W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > April 2017

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-text-decor] Minimum width for unskipped lines?

From: Behnam Esfahbod via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2017 20:08:37 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-297526373-1493237316-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Some notes from our discussion on the ALReq weekly meeting, specifically regarding this issue for Arabic script:

First, regarding underline position in Arabic script:
* It almost never (except calligraphy styles/situations) collides with dots or not-that-tall letters (like REH or WAW). So, this behavior is actually something new and needs to be developed. The current common-practice with exiting digital publishing tools is to set a `border-bottom` instead of `underline`.
* To get a good underline experience that's already a common-practice, the underline should be positioned below all the dots and not-that-tall letters. We can develop an algorithm to calculate this from font glyphs data.

Now, about the underline that's too high for Arabic script, assuming that users actually want it:
* In my opinion, `min-underline-ink-width` is a property of the typeface and shall be stored in the fonts, possibly per script or even per language.
* When not provided by the font, we can calculate `min-underline-ink-width` for the font based on the size of the dot glyphs (dot, two-dots, ...). A possible value would be 200% of the maximum of the dot glyphs' width.
* Of course some large values will result in underline not getting drawn for most of the width of some words. Well, that's why it shouldn't be positioned so high in the first place!

Personally, I highly recommend to focus on fixing the position problem first, and try to fix the ink issue for a better positioned underline (where in rare cases underline collides with ink, like for a MEEM with a long tail).

GitHub Notification of comment by behnam
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1288#issuecomment-297526373 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 26 April 2017 20:08:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 06:41:11 UTC