W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > January to March 2007

Re: CSS3 Text - Edit suggestions

From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 10:36:04 -0500
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>, www-style@w3.org, 'WWW International' <www-international@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20070220153604.GC17709@mercury.ccil.org>

fantasai scripsit:

> >In both our vertical modes (rl and lr), the baseline is rotated the 
> >same way, isn't it? So 'left' is always top and 'right' always bottom. 
> >Maybe it is useful to add that as a note: "(I.e., text is aligned at 
> >the bottom.)"
> 
> This is true by default, but it may not be true for specific values
> of glyph-orientation: rotating glyphs rotates their baseline.
> glyph-orientation can make glyphs stand upright in a column, but it
> can also turn the line 180deg to face the other way.

Just so.  For example, Mongolian (strongly top-to-bottom) is rotated
clockwise to embed it in Arabic script, but counterclockwise to
embed it in Cyrillic or Latin script.

Spell it out:  "In vertical mode, 'left' means 'top' and 'right'
means 'bottom'"

(If indeed this is true: is it true of vertical Ogham, which the
Unicode Standard (wrongly, in my view) says is strongly bottom-to-top?)

> How is 'line-height' biased towards horizontal text?

Is not the line-height of vertical text in fact a horizontally measured
distance?

-- 
John Cowan  cowan@ccil.org  http://ccil.org/~cowan
If I have seen farther than others, it is because I am surrounded by dwarves.
        --Murray Gell-Mann
Received on Tuesday, 20 February 2007 15:36:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 19:17:09 GMT