- From: Koji Ishii via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2025 09:36:27 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
So you want to redo the discussion at #10703, do I understand correctly? Let's involve @michaeltaranto then. @michaeltaranto said `alphabetic` is the most intuitive default for `cap` and `ex`, not a magic, and I heard some authors agreeing with it. @fanatsai said defaulting to `alphabetic` isn't safe, and IIUC you agree with it, correct? To me, `cap` and `ex` are already unsafe, they clip parts of glyphs, and thus `alphabetic` clipping parts of glyphs is the same level of the safety as `cap` and `ex`. So I guess points we want to discuss are: * Is `alphabetic` more intuitive default for `cap` and `ex` than `text` or `auto`? * Is `alphabetic` more unsafe than `cap` and `ex`? Are there any other points we want to discuss? > since cap, ex, and alphabetic are going to be used for non-Latin scripts in the absence of proper metrics for many scripts in the world. I heard from CJK authors that `cap`, `ex`, and `alphabetic` aren't useful for them. Do you have examples of non-Latin scripts where `cap` and `ex` are useful, but `alphabetic` isn't? -- GitHub Notification of comment by kojiishi Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/11460#issuecomment-2621127840 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 29 January 2025 09:36:28 UTC