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

Re: Western vertical texts

From: Ambrose LI <ambrose.li@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 01:14:46 -0500
Message-ID: <CADJvFOXKLmYjXAX7waTcsBhVkRhasCvt6Gohd6g4o+PpHcf3SA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
Cc: Eric Muller <emuller@adobe.com>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
2012/3/2 Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>:
>> From: Ambrose LI [mailto:ambrose.li@gmail.com]
>>
>> No, I don't think he said make it UA dependent. He said vertical
>> writing in Latin text should be treated as tate-chu-yoko partly
>> because UA considerations support this behaviour.
>
> Oh, sorry, probably my English skill problem. He said the
> use case difference is marginal and wanted to "give room for
> implementations," which I understood UA dependent.
>
> If the use case difference is marginal, I do not see a good reason
> for WebKit Mac to change the already implemented behavior.

Oh, sorry, I missed that part. I guess he did say UA dependent then,
for the specific use case of text-orientation:upright plus fonts that
do not have vertical metrics. Please ignore my previous comment.

I’m not sure if the use case for text-orientation:upright and fonts
that do not have vertical metrics is really “marginal” though. I doubt
most Chinese fonts have proper vertical metrics.

> I also wonder how good "always use 1em height" is for Latin upright
> text.

I suppose this depends on what we are using this for and what we
are expecting. The em is pretty much an arbitrary unit in Latin fonts.
Usually it should look reasonable, but in some fonts (especially
calligraphic fonts) there might be problems. That said, the chance
of setting vertical text with these fonts is, I suppose, probably
fairly small.

>
>
> Regards,
> Koji



-- 
cheers,
-ambrose <http://gniw.ca>
Received on Friday, 2 March 2012 06:15:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:51 GMT