W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2007

RE: Capability

From: Paul Nelson (ATC) <paulnel@winse.microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 08:46:55 -0800
Message-ID: <49C257E2C13F584790B2E302E021B6F9128C980B@winse-msg-01.segroup.winse.corp.microsoft.com>
To: Christoph Päper <christoph.paeper@crissov.de>, W3C CSS <www-style@w3.org>

> which have been withdrawn for good reasons.

This is a matter of personal opinion. I have done CSS markup for a lot of strange pages using 'writing-mode' and see that it is possible to use with ease. 


Paul


-----Original Message-----
From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Christoph Päper
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 1:32 AM
To: W3C CSS
Subject: Re: Capability


Paul Nelson, 2007-01-11:
> IE's support of vertical text is based on using the 'writing-mode'  
> property as defined by CSS-3 and XSL-FO for a number of years now.

I do not know about XSL-FO, but there is no REC of any CSS level 3  
module yet so it cannot have specified anything for years, although  
the Text module once had reached CR status it has been a mere WD for  
one and a half years now. Level 2 does not include 'writing-mode'.

You, Paul, of course know that, you are one of the editors (according  
to <http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/current-work#text>, not the current  
draft). What makes your argument awkward is that you are also an  
employee of the only company who originally implemented the draft in  
its product (or rather had the draft written by another employee to  
reflect said implementation).

I think it was the right decision to redo the module (now split into  
two), but it is regress to try too hard to make new drafts compatible  
to implementations of old ones which have been withdrawn for good  
reasons.

Christoph Päper
Received on Tuesday, 20 February 2007 16:46:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:49 GMT