W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2013

[css3-text] minor editorial comments

From: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 21:26:58 -0700 (PDT)
To: W3C Style <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1829418972.20248118.1370406418031.JavaMail.root@mozilla.com>


At-risk list includes:
 
  "minimum and maximum limits of ‘word-spacing’ and ‘letter-spacing’"

The 'letter-spacing' property was revised to remove these so that's no
longer part of the spec.

The current ED contains multiple "issues" that aren't really issues
but reminders to check something, requests for feedback, etc.  I think
only the *issues* should be marked as such, use some other form of
markup for the other items so that it's easier to review the actual
issues.

There's a property index but no index.  Ditto for the the Writing
Modes spec. Both need an index, especially given the *large* number of
terms defined for each ("bi-orientational" in WM being my personal favorite).

http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-text/#letter-spacing0

> When the effective letter-spacing between two characters is not zero
> (due to either justification or a non-zero specified optimum), user
> agents should not apply optional ligatures. 

That's not quite exact enough I think, I would suggest:

s/not apply optional ligatures/not apply optional ligatures enabled by default/

The Fonts spec defines these so this way implementors will know
precisely what is to be disabled.

http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-text/#appendix-f-text-processing-order-of-oper

Text Processing Order of Operations

The inner list, under "4. text wrapping", should use some other
enumeration, I would suggest lower Latin.

  s/glyph selection and kerning/glyph selection and positioning/

Kerning is just one of several positioning operations when laying out
text runs.
Received on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 04:27:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:12 UTC