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

Re: [css3-writing-modes] column progression direction

From: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 23:58:35 +1000
Message-ID: <4FE47A0B.2030407@css-class.com>
To: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
CC: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, CJK discussion <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>
On 21/06/2012 3:24 PM, Koji Ishii wrote:
>> From: fantasai [mailto:fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net]
>
>> Alex Mogilevsky raised an issue in a discussion awhile back: specifically, what should
>> the column progression direction be if the parent of the multi-column element belongs
>> to an orthogonal flow with a block flow direction opposite to the multi-col element's
>> inline direction?
>>
>> E.g. suppose I have a vertical Japanese document:
>>
>>
>>    | | | | | V
>>    | | | | | V
>>    | | | | | V
>>    | | | | | |
>>    | | | | | |
>>      <====
>>
>> Then I insert a horizontal (LTR) multicol element
>>
>>>>> -- >>>-- | | | | | V
>> ----- ----- | | | | | V
>> --A-- --B-- | | | | | V
>> ----- ----- | | | | | |
>> ----- ----- | | | | | |
>>                  <====
>>
>> Is column A or B first in the logical order?
>
> This is a very interesting question. I think the simple answer is "column A is first."

I agree with Koji here but it makes a mess of overflow and this is why I 
have previously stated on this mailing list that a concept of logical 
block progression be introduced [1] [2]. It is only in Old Mongolian 
that that you don't have this conflict of inline overflow and block 
overflow [3].


1. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Oct/0645.html
2. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Jun/0199.html
3. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Jun/0756.html



-- 
Alan Gresley
http://css-3d.org/
http://css-class.com/
Received on Friday, 22 June 2012 13:59:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:55 GMT