- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 16:46:58 -0500
- To: Gérard Talbot <www-style@gtalbot.org>
- Cc: W3C www-style mailing list <www-style@w3.org>
On 02/07/2017 04:13 PM, Gérard Talbot wrote: > Le 2017-02-07 14:51, fantasai a écrit : >> On 02/03/2017 07:10 PM, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux wrote: >>> Hi fantasai, >>> >>>> The key thing to realize is that the "before" side and the "over" side do not >>>> coincide in Mongolian writing. See https://www.w3.org/TR/css-writing-modes-3/#text-flow >>> >>> I have filed https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/240 >>> >>>> Haven't gotten any use-case-backed requests yet, though. >>> >>> Can you provide (privately if you prefer) what the WG considers a >>> "use-case-backed request"? >> >> Someone being like, "I want to make a page that looks like X and >> it's not possible with CSS today", where X is a realistic thing >> someone would want to do rather than a mere thought experiment. > > Elika, > > Maybe this reply is not perfectly on topic... but anyways... > > While developing a test [1] on text-shadow, I stumbled on the difficulty of figuring out where the emphasis marks for > 'text-emphasis-position' should be respectively for glyphs with 'text-orientation: upgright' and 'text-orientation: sideways'. > > The spec on text-emphasis-position [2] states > > 'over' > Draw marks over the text in horizontal writing mode. > > 'right' > Draw marks to the right of the text in vertical writing mode. > > but what if I use 'text-orientation: upright' on a run of text? Then what? “over”, “horizontal writing mode”, and “vertical writing mode” are technical terms defined in Writing Modes. You would draw the marks to the right, which is “over” for 'upright' text: https://www.w3.org/TR/css-writing-modes-3/#logical-to-physical ~fantasai
Received on Tuesday, 7 February 2017 21:47:31 UTC