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

RE: [css3-writing-modes] css-logical (was before/after terminology alternative?

From: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 22:55:41 -0400
To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
CC: Asmus Freytag <asmusf@ix.netcom.com>, MURAKAMI Shinyu <murakami@antenna.co.jp>, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>, "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, "liam@w3.org" <liam@w3.org>, koba <koba@antenna.co.jp>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "public-i18n-cjk@w3.org" <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>
Message-ID: <A592E245B36A8949BDB0A302B375FB4E0DA231A468@MAILR001.mail.lan>
I just realized I don't update you these days on the status in Japan, sorry about that.

The primary career is still the e-books market, Google Books Japan has started a couple of weeks ago, and as far as I know, at least 200,000 HTML pages with writing-mode:vertical-rl have been created and distributed commercially today. I expect this number to increase by the factor of 5 to 10 in 3 to 6 months.

None of them use logical directions at all. I'd like to finish this 17 years old WD at least for the part people has started using this widely.


Regards,
Koji

-----Original Message-----
From: Ishii, Koji a | Koji | EBJB [mailto:koji.a.ishii@mail.rakuten.com] 
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 11:31 AM
To: Tab Atkins Jr.; Glenn Adams
Cc: Koji Ishii; Asmus Freytag; MURAKAMI Shinyu; Sylvain Galineau; "Martin J. Dürst"; liam@w3.org; koba; www-style@w3.org; fantasai; public-i18n-cjk@w3.org
Subject: RE: [css3-writing-modes] css-logical (was before/after terminology alternative?

> From: Tab Atkins Jr. [mailto:jackalmage@gmail.com] On Wed, Oct 10, 
> 2012 at 6:19 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote:
> > Due to my own fault, I failed to object at the time the WG made that 
> > resolution. At this point, I will need to raise an FO unless it can 
> > be agreed to revert that earlier decision. Which is easier? Doing an 
> > FO process or reverting?
> 
> Given that you'll apparently object to Koji's suggested compromise as 
> well, it doesn't matter very much.

Is he? He objects to change, and he doesn't seem to object to keep discussing to me.

The value of having logical directions in writing-modes spec isn't high. There has been a wish to have logical properties back in future, so the level 1 can contain just directions, and the level 2 may be able to cover logical properties too.

Neither FO nor reverting is workable for everyone. I can see postponing logical directions is the only workable solution.


Regards,
Koji

Received on Thursday, 11 October 2012 02:56:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:21:01 GMT