W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > December 2012

Re: [css3-text] line-break needs a normative definition

From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 07:36:17 -0700
Message-ID: <CACQ=j+e3rw4vBpEkG1pLUdJA49Wh9D1OCsmnbgXM_-mbq_7KKg@mail.gmail.com>
To: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
Cc: W3C Style <www-style@w3.org>
On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 9:35 PM, John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com> wrote:

>
> Glenn Adams wrote:
>
> > > Kato-san has already pointed out the lack of prioritization
> > > between the definitions of 'word-break' and 'line-break' as
> > > currently specified in CSS3 Text. [1]
> > >
> > > But I think a larger issue is that this property defines three
> > > levels of breaking, 'loose', 'normal', and 'strict' with only
> > > suggestions as to what the exact meaning of these levels are.
> > >
> > >   http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-text/#line-break
> >
> > What do you mean by "suggestions"? The current spec provides
> > sufficiently precise meaning for these terms, at least sufficiently
> > specific to implement and test in Webkit [1][2][3].
> >
> > On the point of optionality that you make, I agree it would be best
> > to NOT mark the feature as optional.
>
> I'm not arguing that it's not possible to implement, I'm saying the
> spec wording is a "recommendation", not a normative set of
> requirements.
>
> >From the definition of 'line-break' in CSS3 Text [1]:
>
>   CSS distinguishes between three levels of strictness in
>   the rules for text wrapping. The precise set of rules in
>   effect for each level is up to the UA and should follow
>   language conventions. However, this specification does
>   recommend that [... list of suggestions ...].
>
> The definitions of the levels need to be normative, even if that just
> means defining what's in the spec now as a minimum set of requirements
> for each level.  Along with no "this is optional" baloney.
>

Ah, I see you are confusing the term "normative" with "mandatory". An
optional feature definition is still a normative definition.
Received on Friday, 7 December 2012 14:37:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:21:03 GMT