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

Re: [css3-writing-modes] a third option for implementing logical properties

From: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 17:38:04 -0700 (PDT)
To: koba Mobile2 <koba@antenna.co.jp>
Cc: www-style@w3.org, howcome@opera.com
Message-ID: <382919581.179378.1288053484848.JavaMail.root@cm-mail03.mozilla.org>
Tokushge Kobayashi wrote:

> > Implementation cost is one metric, but no the only one. For one,
> > there's also a memory cost. I presume you have implemented this so
> > that the logical propertie cascade and inherit separately? on a
> > per-element basis? And cannot be resolved until you know the
> > computed value for 'writing-mode'? If so, the memory use will be
> > significant: ~35 property values for every element.
> 
> The requests from end users or market is more important than any
> implementation cost or memory cost.

Er, no.  Specs are always a subset of the complete set of user requsted
features. Specs that aren't are a nightmare (see SVG 1.2).

Logical properties have been proposed in the context of vertical text as
a way of simplifying the task of an author trying create vertical and
horizontal layouts with a shared stylesheet.  HÃ¥kon is merely asking
whether this approach is the best way when this many new properties are
required.

You seem to be demanding a particular solution when you should be
showing why logical properties are the better solution.

> Your opinion is an excuse from an incompetent implementor.

No, it's the concern of an implementor who has a long history
of developing browsers for devices that run with restricted memory.

John Daggett
Received on Tuesday, 26 October 2010 00:38:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:33 GMT