W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-svg-wg@w3.org > October to December 2008

ISSUE-2175 (tb-rl, tb-lr): Revisit vertical text for tb-rl, tb-lr [SVG Core 2.0]

From: SVG Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2008 12:56:28 -0500 (EST)
To: public-svg-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <20081102175628.A9B5D4DD65@crusher.w3.org>


ISSUE-2175 (tb-rl, tb-lr): Revisit vertical text for tb-rl, tb-lr [SVG Core 2.0]

http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2175

Raised by: Doug Schepers
On product: SVG Core 2.0

Richard Ishida (i18n)
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2008Oct/0079.html>:
[[
Comment 7
At http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/0810-svg-tiny/
Editorial/substantive: E
Tracked by: RI

Location in reviewed document:
10.6.1 [http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile12/text.html#TextLayoutIntroduction]

Comment: 
"For top-to-bottom text, the block-progression-direction always points 90 degrees counter-clockwise from the reference orientation vector because the only available top-to-bottom writing mode is tb-rl."

 
I think this sentence needs to be deleted, since SVG Tiny doesn't support vertical text. If it is there as a general statement, it should be made clearer, and corrected to say that tb-rl is not the only vertical writing mode.
]]

Doug Schepers
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2008Oct/0094.html>
[[
I've removed the offending sentence, but be warned that it may return in
SVG Full.  How would you reword this in light of writing-mode="tb-lr"
(for Mongolian, Manchu and Phags-pa script), a value not covered in SVG
1.1 Full?

Please let us know if this satisfies your comment, in terms of the SVG
1.2 Tiny spec.
]]
Received on Sunday, 2 November 2008 17:56:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 2 November 2008 17:56:38 GMT