- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2023 16:54:22 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
The CSS Working Group just discussed `language parameters for word-boundary-detection`, and agreed to the following: * `RESOLVED: remove auto () from word-boundary-detection, add keyword to word-break for this functionality` <details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary> <fantasai> Topic: language parameters for word-boundary-detection<br> <fantasai> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7193<br> <fantasai> myles: THis is a topic about line-breaking<br> <fantasai> myles: we're implementing fancy line breaking, and I hear Chrome is doing the same<br> <fantasai> myles: interesting part is that it's based on words and phrases for CJK<br> <fantasai> myles: right now opt-in for CSS is word-boundary-detection with auto value<br> <fantasai> myles: auto value in CSS is actually a function that takes a locale string<br> <fantasai> myles: this issue is for removing the locale string<br> <fantasai> myles: 2 reasons we think it's good idea to remove<br> <fantasai> myles: 1st, we don't have ability to do this in our platform APIs, can't distinguish language<br> <fantasai> myles: 2nd is, if dictionaries aren't available for a language we fall back to normal rules, and that's fine, not a deal-breaker<br> <fantasai> myles: so turn it on for some languages and not others, doesn't help authors and doesn't help implementers<br> <Rossen_> ack flackr<br> <Rossen_> ack florian<br> <fantasai> florian: Doing something like this has been on my to-do list for a long time, so thanks for the push<br> <fantasai> florian: this is the direction I want to go in as well, and i18nWG as well<br> <fantasai> florian: as for specific PR, I haven't reviewed yet, and will do this week<br> <fantasai> florian: needs more work<br> <fantasai> florian: you extracted some bits to put into word-break, and that's fine, but leftover bits don't make sense<br> <iank_> From my understanding (i'd need to double check with Koji) I believe we support a new separate value for word-break.<br> <fantasai> florian: we might actually want to remove the rest of word-boundary-detection entirely<br> <fantasai> florian: and then there's some shared definitions if we're keeping it, and word-break with new value, so it needs more editorial adjustment<br> <fantasai> florian: but we're getting somewhere<br> <fantasai> florian: but I have a question, in the new PR<br> <fantasai> florian: I've heard argued both ways before<br> <fantasai> florian: so wondering what you had in mind<br> <fantasai> florian: You said in intro, "this is for phrase detection"<br> <fantasai> florian: but there was also suggestion of doing phrase grouping for languages like English, which do space separation<br> <fantasai> florian: this would e.g. group noun with its article<br> <fantasai> florian: Are you thinking MAY, MUST NOT, or SHOULD for such languages?<br> <fantasai> myles: first few topics you describe are editorial, don't need to discuss in WG<br> <fantasai> myles: last question, our linebreakers right now don't affect Latin scripts<br> <fantasai> myles: in the future we might want to add support<br> <fantasai> iank_: same here<br> <fantasai> florian: so even though this is on my back burner, I will be able to within the week<br> <fantasai> florian: so I certainly like to do this<br> <iank_> (I believe we are the same - but I might be wrong - and would have to double check with Koji).<br> <fantasai> florian: I think we probably also want to ask i18nWG for part you didn't touch<br> <fantasai> florian: for languages like Thai, effectively this is already baked in<br> <fantasai> florian: Thai doesn't use spaces, but it uses dictionary-based word detection to find word breaks<br> <fantasai> florian: that's by default<br> <fantasai> florian: but the word-boundary-detection had option to turn that off, in case authors wanted to do it manually<br> <fantasai> florian: maybe because they are e.g. writing a language that's not quite Thai<br> <fantasai> florian: so question for i18nWG is, do we want to preserve this ability? in which case we might need a keyword for that in word-break as well<br> <fantasai> Rossen_: Florian, can't tell if you're diverting resolution?<br> <fantasai> florian: It's going in the right direction, but not ready yet<br> <fantasai> myles: Proposal is to remove auto() function from word-boundary-detection and add keyword to word-break<br> <fantasai> florian: fully support<br> <fantasai> Rossen_: any additional comments or objections?<br> <fantasai> RESOLVED: remove auto () from word-boundary-detection, add keyword to word-break for this functionality<br> </details> -- GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7193#issuecomment-1611772475 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 28 June 2023 16:54:24 UTC