W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > June 2020

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-inline-3] text-edge-over/text-edge-under vs text-edge shorthand (#5236)

From: Florian Rivoal via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 05:57:48 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-645794575-1592459867-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
I am not convinced we need the longhands, but we should certainly have a shorthand. The simplest grammar would probably be this:

text-edge: leading | normal | <over-metric> <under-metric>
<over-metric>: text | cap | ex | ideographic | ideographic-ink
<under-metric>: text | alphabetic | ideographic | ideographic-ink

I suppose we could also make the second value optional, and map it to the same value as the first one in the cases where the pairs exist (`text`, `ideographic`, and `ideographic-ink`). What  the implied second value would be if you picked `cap` or `ex` as the over side is less obvious though. Maybe `cap`, which is a broad metric, might be matched with `text` for the under side, while `ex`, which is a tight metric, would be with `alphabetic`. 

GitHub Notification of comment by frivoal
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5236#issuecomment-645794575 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 18 June 2020 05:57:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 06:42:09 UTC