W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > April to June 2014

Re: [css-text] I18N-ISSUE-331: No kashida style or relationship to styles 'distribute' and 'inter-word'

From: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 07:21:35 +0000
To: "Phillips, Addison" <addison@lab126.com>
CC: "CSS WWW Style (www-style@w3.org)" <www-style@w3.org>, www International <www-international@w3.org>
Message-ID: <AC45A839-0BE2-4D70-87AA-5A2DCBC6CF06@gluesoft.co.jp>
On Apr 21, 2014, at 6:59 AM, Phillips, Addison <addison@lab126.com> wrote:

>> There was a request in Tucson F2F[1] that:
>> * “auto” automagically does the best justification for the content language
> 
> Which is fine. Note that our comment is that *only* the "auto" justification selects "kashida" (if any do).

So, is the suggestion to recommend the use of kashida for “auto” if the content language is Arabic? I’m sorry for my ignorance but I don’t have a good sense whether kashida should be on by default or not, for what content languages. If I18N could recommend anything, I could try to put it in as an informative text, just like we refer to JLREQ for Japanese.

Note that we have the following informative text already[1]:
> using cursive elongation for Arabic
Isn’t this kashida?

>> * Define values only when multiple choices of justification behavior are
>> required within one language
> 
> Which is also "okay", insofar as it goes. But some of these justification forms are ill-suited to certain scripts or languages. And kashida certainly meets this criterion: several languages might need to select it.

Yeah, that’s my understanding too. MS Word has 3 options for kashida[2], but I’m unable to justify them, nor specify the behavior.

It looks like harfbuzz is willing to implement kashida someday[3], at that point we may be able to get better information on what options we should put into CSS.

>> * That behavior should be described so that implementers who do not know the
>> language can implement in an interoperable way and with our knowledge, the
>> “kashida” value did not meet the criteria.
> 
> Kashida is not currently well-described in English, so far as I know. I have it on good authority that there is at least one book in Persian on the topic. I am unaware (having neither seen the book nor the ability to read Persian) of whether this would apply generally or only to that language family, or how well this document succeeds at its task.
> 
> So I agree that kashida does not meet this criterion presently. But, since you mention it in the text (you even have an example of Tasmeem rendering it), it seems like an oversight to mention it and even encourage it in "auto" but not do say anything further (such as whether it is on or off in one of the other modes or if those modes).

Because I’m technically unable to…does I18N WG recommend to turn kashida off for “none" and "inter-word”, but on for “auto” and “distribute"?

>> The discussion started to cut values down to “auto | distribute”[2], then we had
>> information that “none” and “inter-word” meet the criteria.
> 
> I agree that these all meet the criteria you established. The question we asked is what the effect of some of the other keywords (notably inter-word) would be on a kashida implementation (as well as whether a kashida type or types could be created later).
>> 
>> Can you give such information for “kashida”?
> 
> See above. We would like to, but are not in a position to.

Sadly, me too, but you seem to have better knowledge than me. Your support is appreciated.

[1] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-text/#text-justify-property
[2] http://office.microsoft.com/en-gb/word-help/specify-kashida-length-in-arabic-text-HP005258100.aspx
[3] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/persian-computing/s-ftgmBvlF0

/koji
Received on Wednesday, 23 April 2014 07:22:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 23 April 2014 07:22:11 UTC