W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > January to March 2012

Re: Shaping characters in upright orientation in vertical text flow

From: Mohamed Mohie <MOHIEM@eg.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 13:33:44 +0200
To: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Cc: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>, Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>, "public-i18n-bidi@w3.org" <public-i18n-bidi@w3.org>, "'WWW International' (www-international@w3.org)" <www-international@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF79A2E0FE.F91A6F7A-ON42257988.003F6C17-42257988.003F8388@eg.ibm.com>
As Arabic speaking user in case we lay out Arabic characters in vertical
form then it should be in the isolated form.

Thanks And Best regards,
Mohamed Mohie , PMP®
_______________________________________________________
Manager of Arabic Competence and Globalization Center (ACGC)
GCoC BIDI , Advisory Software Engineer, Project Manager, M.Sc.
Cairo Technology Development Center (CTDC)
IBM Egypt
email : mohiem@eg.ibm.com





From:	"Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
To:	Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
Cc:	"public-i18n-bidi@w3.org" <public-i18n-bidi@w3.org>, "'WWW
            International' (www-international@w3.org)"
            <www-international@w3.org>, John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
Date:	17/01/2012 07:18 Õ
Subject:	Re: Shaping characters in upright orientation in vertical text
            flow



I think for Latin and similar scripts, it makes a lot of sense to have a
setting where the characters are upright. There may be some character
combinations (a possible example may be ij in Dutch) which would be
written as one unit in this case. Similar rules may apply to Indic and
South-East Asian grapheme clusters, and of course all combining
characters go with the base character as a single unit.

The main question then is for fully cursive scripts such as Arabic. For
this, I think that fantasai is in a much better position to judge what
makes sense than others.

Regards,    Martin.

On 2012/01/17 13:22, Koji Ishii wrote:
> Hello, I've got an item that I need your help.
>
> CSS Writing Modes Level 3 has the "text-orientation" property[1]. With
that, you can set glyph orientation in vertical text flow.
>
> The issue is about how to render shaping characters when
"text-orientation: upright" is applied. Please scroll down the spec a
little bit to see "Figure 12. 'text-orientation' values"; "upright" is the
one I'm talking about. You see all characters including Latin are upright
in this style.
>
> How do you expect shaping characters look in this case?
>
> Currently, the spec states "Shaping characters from such scripts are
shaped in their isolated forms." This is primarily from fantasai's
investigations.
>
> Another source to support this behavior is how Excel renders its vertical
text flow[2].
>
> There're other options such as "always keep them sideways (i.e., rotated
by 90 degrees.)" This is the behavior usually done by using
"text-orientation: sideways-right"[1] (see Figure 12 for examples,) but I
understand there're some scripts that can never be written in upright and
therefore renders the same way as "sideways-right" even when author applied
"upright".
>
> I personally have no idea which one is the right behavior here.
>
> John Daggett in his recent mail pointed out that[3]:
>> For 'upright' the spec currently states "Shaping characters from
>> such scripts are shaped in their isolated forms." This means that
>> 'upright' applied to Arabic in vertical text would break the shaping.
>> I'm really not sure that this is the right behavior, I think this
behavior
>> is why Microsoft was talking about making an alternate proposal for
>> UTR50.
>
> Could anyone give us your opinions on this? Thank you for your support in
advance.
>
> [1] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-writing-modes/#text-orientation

> [2]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2012Jan/att-0010/upright-excel.png


> [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012Jan/0655.html

>
> Regards,
> Koji
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 17 January 2012 11:34:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 17 January 2012 11:34:49 GMT