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

Re: [css3-writing-modes] vertical orientation and UTR50

From: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 05:10:28 -0700 (PDT)
To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1993554632.955073.1341317428871.JavaMail.root@mozilla.com>

Koji Ishii wrote:

> > I don't think there's a need for a separate HO property and have
> > posted a message in the UTR50 forum stating this. [1]  In fact,
> > there's no role for HO in defining the behavior of the
> > 'text-orientation' property since this property only affects
> > vertical runs, *not* horizontal runs.  So the sentence starting
> > with "The one exception..." can be omitted entirely.  In vertical
> > runs, Mongolian and Phags-pa are displayed upright, just as the
> > MVO/SVO reflects.
> Well, you know far more on Mongolian than I do, so I'd like to trust
> you, but other two I also trust -- Laurentiau and fantasai think
> Mongolian and Phags-pa should be rendered rotated, so I hope you can
> find a consensus in the forum. I guess it's just difference of
> visual orientations and rendering orientations, maybe wrong, but
> it's a UTC's issue.

Koji, are you sure this is what they are thinking?  These are
*vertical* text runs we're talking about in the context of

> HO was resolved on the last UTC conference, it may not survive as
> you say, but we can remove from our spec if they were removed from
> UTR#50. We were there too, and supported the resolution, so not
> using HO looks strange to me. I was ok either if it was an
> informative text, but if the text is normative, I think we should
> follow UTC's resolution.

Look at the data, no implementation needs to use that data, they will
realize immediately that the data reduces to "if the script is
Mongolian or Phags-pa handle the horizontal case differently".

I'm completely at a loss to understand why you requested a separate
property value when expressing that very simple condition is

John Daggett
Received on Tuesday, 3 July 2012 12:11:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:01 UTC