W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2010

Re: Another cut on the Character-Transform Property

From: Adam Twardoch (Lists) <list.adam@twardoch.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 13:37:12 +0200
To: John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>
Message-Id: <7AB6380C-95C0-4802-9287-9F9626243C84@twardoch.com>
Cc: Thomas Phinney <tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
text-elevation ;)

On 2010-04-04, at 05:08, John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com> wrote:

> Thomas Phinney wrote:
>> Steve's proposal seems sound. But I don't think his names are much  
>> better than the original: those names tell me even less about what  
>> the feature might do, and like the original name could apply to any  
>> feature. Maybe "glyph-position" or perhaps "text-position"?
> When working on math typesetting fonts, we discovered that the term  
> 'script-style' was fairly common to refer to superscript and  
> subscript glyphs. My only concern with recommending it in this  
> instance, is that the term 'script' is already overloaded, but it  
> still strikes me as more precise than 'character-transform' or  
> 'glyph-position', which could mean anything and everything.
> John Hudson
Received on Sunday, 4 April 2010 11:37:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:33 UTC