- From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2014 11:44:33 -0800
- To: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
- Cc: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>, Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, Tantek Celik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
> On Dec 12, 2014, at 6:53 AM, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote: > > >> On 02 Dec 2014, at 02:10, Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Yeah, right, I was confused with carets, sorry about that. >> >>> On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 7:04 AM, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote: >>> >>> I don¡¯t think we should go with a MUST level requirement that the cursor be perpendicular to the path (although I don¡¯t think there¡¯d be anything wrong with a MAY, if any UA is willing to rotate cursors in a fine grained manner, more power to them), but we may want to make a requirement of switching between horizontal and vertical when the angle of the text / tangent of the path cross +/- 45 degrees. >> >> I think we should keep it "MAY". We should not prevent UA doing >> better, but UA might not want to do that while elements are animating. >> >> /koji > > > Any other opinions on this topic? when the cursor (mouse cursor, not text caret) is hovering some text that's been either rotated by a transform, or shaped along a path, should this visual orientation affect the choice of a vertical / horizontal cursor (MAY? MUST?) or should we limit the influence to the writing mode (and associated) properties? I think the spec should say it must be perpendicular to the baseline, as determined by the writing mode, and that transforms and any other properties that rotate the text, such as text along a path, may (should?) also rotate the cursor in order to maintain this perpendicularity.
Received on Sunday, 14 December 2014 19:45:02 UTC