- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 01:21:31 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
The CSS Working Group just discussed `Shearing Vertical Text`. <details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary> <fantasai> Topic: Shearing Vertical Text<br> <fantasai> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2983<br> <birtles> pal: today there's the ability to specify slant on individual characters using oblique<br> <birtles> ... or italic<br> <birtles> ... sometimes it's useful to apply shear not on character-by-character but entire line<br> <birtles> ... that's desirable to apply alignment between ruby and base text<br> <birtles> ... it's subtle but really matters to folks that care<br> <birtles> ... separate issue about whether or not we should be able to specify the angle of shear per-character<br> <birtles> ... issue here is applying by the whole line<br> <birtles> nmccully: in print, it's not keeping the height/width of the line when you shear it<br> <birtles> ... you change the shape of the box of each character to a diamond<br> <birtles> ... it's call shatai in Japanese<br> <myles> https://helpx.adobe.com/ch_fr/indesign/using/formatting-cjk-characters.html<br> <myles> this is what Nat is talking about<br> <birtles> ... in subtitles has it become just a shear?<br> <birtles> pal: it seems to be just a one-dimensional thing in subtitles<br> <birtles> ... not sure if it's an artistic desire or technical limitation<br> <birtles> koji: the difference here is a position of the ruby, right?<br> <birtles> pal: yes<br> <birtles> koji: I'm not sure about this use case, but for me changing the position of the ruby looks to me<br> <birtles> ... shearing the individual characters looks better to me<br> <birtles> pal: on the thread some others seem to prefer shearing the whole line<br> <birtles> fantasai: for print we know they want the per-character approach<br> <birtles> ... so I suggest we propose that and take that to the subtitle group and see if that is acceptable<br> <birtles> ... it's possible that the request here for shearing the whole inline-block is just coming from technical limitations<br> <birtles> pal: I like the idea of going back and asking questions<br> <birtles> ... but the issue opened against ttml was specifically about not being able to shear the whole block<br> <birtles> fantasai: I thought the problem was that italics shears in the wrong direction<br> <birtles> koji: can you point to specific individual / issue so I can follow up<br> <florian> q+<br> <birtles> koji: I can't see any ruby in that issue<br> <Rossen__> https://w3c.github.io/ttml2/index.html#style-attribute-shear<br> <AmeliaBR> text-combine-upright does look bad with individual character shear: https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/784#issuecomment-390856934<br> <fantasai> https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/784<br> <birtles> florian: you said we want to shear the entire line OR paragraph<br> <birtles> ... these are two things<br> <birtles> ... for the second option, CSS transforms will do it<br> <birtles> pal: ttml can do all three: character, line, paragraph<br> <birtles> florian: the difference with ruby is more subtle<br> <birtles> ... but the text combine upright case is more obviously different<br> <birtles> pal: the issue in 2983 shows a good example<br> <birtles> ... 2983 ends with a question I asked<br> <birtles> myles: any proposal for how the author would describe to the browser the effect they desire<br> <birtles> pal: yes there is a proposal there<br> <birtles> myles: so a new property?<br> <birtles> ... has anyone considered re-purposing the new syntax for font-style to describe the shearing?<br> <birtles> glenn: no I have not<br> <birtles> ... we introduced three new properties: shear (block), line-shear (per-line including tatechuuyoko), font-shear (glyph box by glyph box)<br> <birtles> myles: one option would be to have font-style: oblique -14deg does shear<br> <birtles> ... and if it looks bad it's a browser bug<br> <birtles> fantasai: I don't think it will look good if there is latin text involved<br> <birtles> myles: there's an issue in the agenda for that later today<br> <birtles> fantasai: I don't think we can mix this with the oblique/italic feature<br> <birtles> nmccully: It's complicated to have these different properties, but I agree with fantasai's desire to have a separate feature for this<br> <birtles> ... to say I want to shear these things correctly, and provide an angle, and let the UA decide how to do it (especially for mixed text)<br> <birtles> koji: I agree with myles and don't understand why specifying an angle doesn't work<br> <birtles> ???: because the fonts<br> <birtles> koji: what exactly doesn't work?<br> <birtles> myles: my proposal is that the font-style property does more than just font selection<br> <birtles> ... it does font selection as it does today and also does the transform as necessary<br> <birtles> pal: the way this was explained to me is that the desired effect was literally just shearing<br> <birtles> koji: we understand, but the point is there are other glyph shearing use cases<br> <birtles> ... that is what myles is proposing<br> <birtles> pal: we need to understand three distinct use cases: per block, per line, per character<br> <nigel> s/???: because the fonts/nigel: you're asking a lot of the implementation and reducing authoring flexibility<br> <birtles> koji: we have per block already, myles is proposing per-character<br> <birtles> ... we are wondering what is needed for line shearing<br> <birtles> fantasai: this example on the screen shows why we can't cover the line case with the same per-glyph approach<br> <birtles> ... the characters all shear in different directions when using font-style: oblique<br> <birtles> (example includes mixed CJK and vertical and horizontal latin)<br> <birtles> myles: yes, we want to discuss this later today<br> <AmeliaBR> +1 for keeping this logically separate; too confusing when mixing latin and upright scripts<br> <birtles> nigel: I think we've understood the use case better, any proposal action?<br> <birtles> fantasai: CSS definitely needs to solve the per-character shearing<br> <birtles> ... block shearing is solved<br> <birtles> ... open question about if more is needed for line-shearing<br> <birtles> pal: for block shearing, transform shears the background too. Is that ok?<br> <birtles> AmeliaBR: you need a wrapper element if you want to avoid that<br> <birtles> pal: does the size change too for the block too?<br> <birtles> ... it doesn't so it extends beyond the background<br> <birtles> ... any chance of a shear property that affects block size?<br> <birtles> myles: transforms that affect layout?<br> <birtles> pal: yes<br> <birtles> AmeliaBR: it could be a dedicated block shear property<br> <birtles> florian: the general solution for transforms that affect layout is hard<br> <birtles> ... a limited use case could be ok<br> <birtles> pal: just reacting to the idea that block shearing is solved<br> </details> -- GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2983#issuecomment-532018412 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 17 September 2019 01:21:33 UTC