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

RE: [css3-writing-modes] transcript of text orientation discussion

From: Stephen Zilles <szilles@adobe.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 18:06:16 -0700
To: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>, John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CE2F61DA5FA23945A4EA99A212B157953867DF327F@nambx03.corp.adobe.com>
See comments below:

Steve Zilles

From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Glenn Adams
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2011 9:59 AM
To: John Daggett
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Subject: Re: [css3-writing-modes] transcript of text orientation discussion

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 7:21 PM, John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com<mailto:jdaggett@mozilla.com>> wrote:

Right, but I just don't see the need, bidi has nesting behavior does it not?

I would expect that the resolution of text orientation should be nestable in a manner similar to bidi nesting.

And there's one final one, which is I don't think shaped scripts should ever be upright.

Mongolian script is shaped and upright (vertical), if I understand Steve's comment correctly. One may also embed (rotated) Arabic script in Mongolian (and vice versa).
[SZ] “upright” means “not rotated”. Mongolian can be done either vertically, TtoB or horizontally, LtoR, but these variants are rotated to keep the shaping. And, you already said that Arabic is rotated (i.e. not upright) in Mongolian, confirming my assertion.

Received on Friday, 15 July 2011 01:07:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:47 UTC