> By reading other messages in this thread, I now understand that > the terms "landscape" and "portrait" have been used to describe > scrolling directions. I don't think this is good use of the terms, but > at least I understand what you mean now.. Yes, I agree the choice of terms was likely not too good on my part -- thus I'll just use vertical/horizontal. > - in the CSS1 formatting model, block-level, non-floating elements > are laid out from top to bottom. This is the major problem with the standard I have (a separate issue from colunmns/pagination but requires similar introductions of properties). > direction content is laid out, but this is not yet available. Note > that CSS1 can equally well support right-to-left as left-to-right > writing direction since this only changes the way content is laid out > *within* the elements.. I just wonder about the truth and solidity behind the internationalization movement if the abilitiy to represent horizontal layouts isn't there. Indeed I've checked and a couple of the eastern languages write lines top-down and work from the right to the left in their representation. The current standard would thus seem to exclude a minimum of 20% of the world's population from using their native language, and also prevents historical representations of old languages -- such as egyptian I believe. However, if the COLHEAD/COLFOOT issue was resolved in the HTML standard there is at least a temporary "hack" that can be done to represent those languages. __ | Mortar: Advanced Web Development <http://bigpic.com/mortar/> | Neil St.Laurent neil@bigpic.com | Big Picture MultimediaReceived on Tuesday, 19 August 1997 11:48:49 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:53:51 GMT