W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 1999

Re: Rotated Content

From: Rasmus Kaj <kaj@raditex.se>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 08:52:05 +0200
To: Daniel.Glazman@der.edf.fr
Cc: www-style@w3.org, springer@netrax.net
Cc: Rasmus Kaj <kaj@raditex.se>
Message-Id: <19990629085205T.kaj@raditex.se>
>>>>> "Kaj" == Rasmus Kaj <kaj@raditex.se> me writes:

 Kaj> It seems to me this is related to the 'position' property, an element
 Kaj> with position: static should probably not be rotatable (just like
 Kaj> 'left' and 'top' don't apply to static elements), so it should
 Kaj> probably go into what is section 0.3.2 in CSS2, "Box offsets: 'top',
 Kaj> 'right', 'bottom', 'left'", something like this:

 Kaj>   'rotate'

 Kaj>     Value:       angle | auto | inherit 
 Kaj>     Initial:     auto 
 Kaj>     Applies to:  all elements (with position other than static)
 Kaj>     Inherited:   no 
 Kaj>     Percentages: N/A
 Kaj>     Media:       visual 

 Kaj>   This property specifies how a box's content is rotated from the
 Kaj>   content of the box's containing block.

 Kaj> Naturally, there should also be examples of this, and what is now
 Kaj> section 4.3.7, Angles [3], should also be updated to note that angles
 Kaj> apply visually as well as aurally.

>>>>> Ian Hickson sort of approeved, and 
>>>>> "DG" == Daniel Glazman <Daniel.Glazman@der.edf.fr> relied:

 DG> Sound like an idea which needs much more work to be formalized...
 DG> and will not be so easy to implement.

Agreed on the formal work, not so sure about the implementation, once
the formal work is done (assumed it is done well).

 DG> 1. What are the reference line and direction ? Mention of bidi is
 DG>    needed. What happens in case of vertical text ? I guess that the
 DG>    non inheritance is here to partially solve the problem.

I thought of it as the box being rotated, and the text keeping
whatever properties it has inside the box. Bidirectional text might be 
a problem, but I don't see it getting much worse because that it is in 
CSS2 because of this ...

 DG> 2. does it really apply to all elements ? If it applies to inline
 DG>    elements, how will it affect the size of the containing box (CSS
 DG>    has only rectangular and non rotated boxes for the moment) and
 DG>    line height ?  How does it affect background and borders of
 DG>    block-level elements ?  Relation with clip and overflow
 DG>    properties ?

As I said, the boxes are rotated, the content (including backgrounds
etc) just follows. And only non-static boxes. Still, it will require a 
careful review of the entire text on the box model.

 DG> 3. I don't think it should apply to a table sub-element TR TD or
 DG> TH !

Hmmm ... rotating a TR might not be very useful, but I think it should
be legal. Rotating THs and TDs sounds more useful (but the same effect
would be possible to get by including another element inside the
TD/TH).  Is it possible (legal / implemented) to use non-static
position on those elements now?

 DG> 4. what is rotated ? the box or the inline data inside the box ?

The box.

Rasmus Kaj ---------------- rasmus@kaj.a.se - http://www.e.kth.se/~kaj/
 \                      You can't grep a window - Use a Unix! Any Unix!
  \--------------------------------------------- http://www.Raditex.se/
Received on Tuesday, 29 June 1999 02:52:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:53:59 GMT