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

On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 9:30 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>wrote:

> 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.
>

I would like to remind that we have at least two new pieces of information
that weren't available when the WG made its resolution:

(1) evidence that head/tail has some semantic problems in Japanese;
(2) evidence of a prior expressed intent to maintain or enhance a single
underlying formatting model between CSS, XSL-FO, and (by extension) other
specs that derive from these (e.g., TTML);

Given this new information, I would suggest we put the question back on the
table at the upcoming F2F to attempt to obtain a final, acceptable
resolution.