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

Re: [CSSWG] Minutes and Resolutions 2010-12-01

From: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2010 00:35:41 +1100
Message-ID: <4CF8F22D.9010604@css-class.com>
To: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
CC: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 3/12/2010 2:01 AM, Brad Kemper wrote:
> The text still appears to be contradictory. Maybe I'm not seeing your
> updated version? What is it supposed to look like when the test
> doesn't fail?

I would presume vertical position wise, much like how IE9 renders it. 
Anyway, if the other implementations did what IE9 did, then the text 
would be more than contradictory since the text would appear backwards. 
Is this correct?

> On Dec 2, 2010, at 6:14 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
>
>> On 12/2/10 3:25 AM, fantasai wrote:
>>> http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20101027/html4/run-in-breaking-002.htm
>>
>>
>>>
> This test was, in fact, pretty confused (partly because it was written before run-in
> inheritance was clarified, and partly because there were some copy/paste errors).
> I've updated it to make sense; webkit does in fact fail the border bit (though that
> may be a general problem with breaking rtl inlines; I haven't checked), as does Opera.


I don't know how you can say Safari fails something when there is no 
line break happening to begin with. Opera 10.63 splits the box.

A question. How is 'direction' and 'unicode-bidi' suppose to work. Is 
IE9 incorrectly reordering the bidi?


-- 
Alan http://css-class.com/

Armies Cannot Stop An Idea Whose Time Has Come. - Victor Hugo
Received on Friday, 3 December 2010 13:36:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:34 GMT