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

Re: Western vertical texts

From: Eric Muller <emuller@adobe.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 09:21:16 -0800
Message-ID: <4F56478C.7020903@adobe.com>
To: Ambrose LI <ambrose.li@gmail.com>
CC: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On 3/1/2012 10:14 PM, Ambrose LI wrote:
> 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.

What I meant by "give room for implementations" is fairly broad. It did 
include "UA dependent", but it also included "do not impose 
costly-to-implement behaviors that do not work too well anyway". For 
example, imposing to use the bounding boxes is certainly more expansive 
than using a glyph-independent metric.

On the topic of "UA dependent", I find the term somewhat too binary to 
account for the real world. Unless and until the specifications give a 
complete description of the result down to the pixel, there will be some 
variation between implementations; the question is what is tolerable. 
And even getting to a narrow range to variation will be tricky without 
diving heavily in the font specifications. Finally, some areas will 
probably never be in reach of standardization: bounding boxes come to 
mind, at least when they account for rasterization artifacts.

Eric.
Received on Tuesday, 6 March 2012 17:21:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 May 2012 03:48:51 GMT