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

RE: Another cut on the Character-Transform Property

From: Richard Fink <rfink@readableweb.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 10:00:08 -0400
To: "'Adam Twardoch \(Lists\)'" <list.adam@twardoch.com>, "'John Hudson'" <tiro@tiro.com>
Cc: "'Thomas Phinney'" <tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>, <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <002401cad3ff$23a1adc0$6ae50940$@com>
Sunday, April 04, 2010 7:37 AM <list.adam@twardoch.com>:

> text-elevation

I counter with:

text-relation

Alternatives: glyph-relation or glyph-script-relation or just
script-relation.

I like text-relation for its simplicity.

Relative positioning is something authors are quite familiar with. It takes
the element out of the normal flow of the document and re-positions it
relative to where it would exist in that normal flow. Is this not similar to
superscript and subscript but on the level of the normal flow of a line of
text?
For myself, I find that text-relation - as a description of this - fits
nicely into my CSS conceptual toolkit. But that's me.
You?

Regards,

Rich

-----Original Message-----
From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Adam Twardoch (Lists)
Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2010 7:37 AM
To: John Hudson
Cc: Thomas Phinney; www-style@w3.org
Subject: Re: Another cut on the Character-Transform Property

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 14:00:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:26 GMT