- From: Florian Rivoal via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 14:53:02 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> all impls do not hang them for pre We're keeping that. This change only affects `pre-wrap`. For `pre`, nothing changes: we do not hang. > you want to allow both hanging and not-hanging for end-of-spaces with forced breaks? Kind of, but the choice is not up to the UA, it depends on what fits the line or not. The key point here is that: 1. Before unforced breaks, we require hanging in all cases (same as "force-end" for punctuation). (same in #3868 and #4095) 2. For #4095, before forced breaks, we require "conditional hanging", which is the type of hanging used by "allow-end" for punctuation: hang if it wouldn't fit, don't hang if it does. #3868 was different, and never hangs it before forced break, even if it doesn't fit. It will give the behavior you wanted when using pre-wrap on a paragraph with two spaces after period: the end-of-line space for spaces in the middle of the paragraph will hang, and therefore justification will work properly. It also means, that if you have a single line, with a forced break at the end, and preserved spaces at the start and end, both the start spaces and the end spaces are taken into account for alignment. See example 6.  This will give the correct result in https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=453830 All that is the same in #3868 a #4095. But here is the difference: If there are more spaces than can fit the line before a forced break, those than don't fit hang. For example, if we have `<div>a_b__</div>` with `white-space:pre-wrap` and a line length that will fit only 4 characters, #3868 will result in ``` |a_ | |b__ | ``` but #4095 will result in ``` |a_b_|_ ``` That seems better because: * #4095 is more web compatible: #3868 would result in content that currently fits in one line to start taking two some times * If you consider editing, and you add a "c" at the end of the example above, both #3868 and #4095 will result in: ``` |a_b_|_ |c | ``` For #4095, that's not surprising for the user, as the previous text doesn't change, but for #3868, it is surprising, as the wrapping of the previous text changes. -- GitHub Notification of comment by frivoal Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3440#issuecomment-515485069 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 26 July 2019 14:53:04 UTC