W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 2011

Re: [css3-text] Splitting CSS Text into Level 3 and Level 4

From: Florian Rivoal <florianr@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 18:25:18 +0100
To: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.v501cghp4p7avi@localhost.localdomain>
On Mon, 05 Dec 2011 17:22:01 +0100, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 7:41 AM, Florian Rivoal <florianr@opera.com>

>> Do you have a proposal of a literal variant that would play nicer with
>> existing things?
>
> Unfortunately, no.  However, in Lists I decided I didn't really need
> ranges in the first place, as the people who would be typing a
> @counter-style rule using some set of non-latin characters would
> probably have their keyboard set up to make it easy to just type out
> the full alphabet.  It takes about 5 seconds to type out the latin
> alphabet, and I assume other languages are similar.  This reasoning
> probably applies here as well.  (Fonts needs the ranges, because
> they're often huge and span alphabets.)

This isn't very important, as what can be expressed is the same. Still,
it seems to me that "ა","ჵ" or "ა":"ჵ" or "ა"~"ჵ" is more readable
and less error prone than either U+10D0-10F05 or
"აბგდევზჱთიკლმნჲოპჟრსტჳუფქღყშჩცძწჭხჴჯჰჵ".

It works even if you're not looking at a language you're not used to.
Quickly, tell me which of the 3 lines below has a mistake:

"a"~"z"
"abcdefghjiklmnopqrstuwvxyz"
U+41-5B

If we can find a nice syntax, I'd like to use it. If we can't, I guess
having explicit listing and <urange>s is good enough, and we could
even drop <urange>s as you say if they turn out not to be that useful.
I'd rather keep them at first though, at least while we're experimenting.
Received on Monday, 5 December 2011 17:25:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:47 GMT