- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 07:19:42 -0700
- To: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>, Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>, Jonathan Kew <jfkthame@googlemail.com>
- CC: Najib Tounsi <ntounsi@emi.ac.ma>, "Phillips, Addison" <addison@lab126.com>, "CSS WWW Style (www-style@w3.org)" <www-style@w3.org>, www International <www-international@w3.org>
On 05/30/2014 05:08 AM, Richard Ishida wrote: > On 23/04/2014 08:58, Koji Ishii wrote: >> >> We have the following text[1]: >> >>> When the effective letter-spacing between two characters is not zero >> > (due to either justification or non-zero computed >>> ‘letter-spacing’), user agents should not apply optional ligatures. >> >> I suppose this clarifies your concern, please let me know if not. >> >> [1] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-text/#letter-spacing > > Is it really expected that implementations decompose optional ligatures > when 'stretching' Arabic text? Are we just making assumptions here, or > is this based on some typographic tradition? No. This statement is not about Arabic, it's about ligatures in general. For example, an "fi" ligature should be broken when letter-spacing is applied. If letter-spacing were to be applied to Arabic *as spacing*, then yes, that, too, should disable optional ligatures. But for Arabic, you're not allowed to do this, thus the effective letter-spacing between Arabic letters is always zero and this sentence does not apply. I will clarify that point. ~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 18 June 2014 16:07:51 UTC