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

Re: [css3-text] Editorial: CJK codepoints or CJK content language rather than CJK text

From: Eric A. Meyer <eric@meyerweb.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 21:41:27 -0400
Message-Id: <p06230904cde80b72e6ee@[192.168.1.65]>
To: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
At 21:09 +0100 6/19/13, Simon Sapin wrote:

>Based on twitter discussions today, there seems to be some confusion 
>as to whether the line-break property "applies to non-CJK text".
>
>Perhaps this could be improved if the spec (especially notes) avoid 
>the term "CJK text" but rather use CJK content language (linked to 
>the definition) or CJK codepoints/characters.

    As the person who was expressing some confusion, I'll say that 
what tripped me up was that there's lots of language about how 
'line-break' is related to CJK but then there are all these non-CJK 
characters.  Unless you squint at "...only CJK codepoints are 
affected, unless the text is marked as Chinese or Japanese, in which 
case some additional common codepoints are affected..." from just the 
right angle, it's easy to think that the spec is self-contradictory.
    Once you grasp that that fragment is telling you that the non-CJK 
codepoints are only affected if they're surrounded by CJK text (or 
text has been declared to be so), then the whole thing falls into 
place.  Without that, chaos.  I think it would be an improvement to 
move that note ahead of the recommendation list and rewrite it to be 
more explicit.
    I'm not sure the recommendation list is doing the spec any favors, 
either, though I've yet to come up with a better alternative that 
isn't ten times as long (by putting everything in a table).

-- 
Eric A. Meyer (eric@meyerweb.com)     http://meyerweb.com/
Received on Thursday, 20 June 2013 01:41:52 UTC

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