Re: [dpub] CSS Priorities Spreadsheet

Thanks Dave,

I had a chat with some of the Interaction Domain people lately. Some takeaway message:

- This sort of information (as well as the pagination use cases) are very important for planning and feedback for the team. Specifically, Chris Lilley will dive into the pagination use cases and, once he has digested them, he is happy to come to one of our calls to discuss the various approaches (Houdini or not Houdini, for example) with us.

- Many of the notes in the table (and also in the remarks below) are around the fact that a specific browser does not implement a specific feature. The experience is that submitting bug reports on missing feature, if coming from major operators/users/institutions/communities, is useful in getting things moving. It is a bit of a pain to find the right bugzilla/github/whatever instance that they listen to (if any:-) but it is worth the trouble.

- On the specific issue of hyphenation and chrome, it seems that there is process: [1] seems to suggest that it is on its way now. :-)

- Some of the issues are related to I18N activities. Note that they maintain a kind of 'meta' document[2] on typography issues, referring to other documents. Maybe checking those to see if features are in line with those we have would be a good idea.

General experience: we should publish/update our documents in a visible manner more often. The fact that we have not republished latinreq for a long time led them to believe that there are no outstanding issues with CSS… We should find a way to make updates more often and actively notify whomever we want to notify.

B.t.w. [3] and [4] seems to be the right bug report areas for Firefox and Chrome, respectively. I do not know what the rules are to submit new reports…

Thanks!

Ivan

[1] http://j.mp/1IzWL5D
[2] http://w3c.github.io/typography/
[3] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=addHitRegion
[4] http://j.mp/1RxQZ9c

> On 24 Jun 2015, at 16:40 , Dave Cramer <dauwhe@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Dave Cramer <dauwhe@gmail.com> wrote:
> During the call today, Ivan expressed interest in having some more detail on the CSS priorities. I've just started such an attempt:
> 
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15IsDMPwSXx197Iqe4I9xh7K8anmJ5c0-OFEG7w0LHYM/edit?usp=sharing
> 
> I have lots of work to do here, but just wanted to know if this looks like a useful approach.
> 
> 
> Yesterday I asked folks on Twitter what improvements they wanted to see to CSS. The most common responses were to have ebook reading systems support more of the CSS that browsers do.
> 
> The other major theme was about how ebook reading systems override the CSS in EPUB files. This process is totally opaque to ebook developers, very frustrating for all involved, and results in unpredictable end results. Shining some light on this process, providing a way for developers to respond to various types of overrides, and giving end users the control they need would be of immense value. I think this should be a priority of DPUB, perhaps even a task force.
> 
> Many of the other suggestions related to typography--better control over hyphenation, open type font features such as ligatures, and drop caps.
> 
> * * *
> 
> I've added priorities to the spreadsheet[1], and sorted by those priorities. In general, specs exist for most of the features listed, but browser support is often spotty. In many cases, some major browsers support a given feature, and other major browsers don't. And that is our fundamental issue.
> 
> Dave
> 
> [1] yes, all my priorities are wrong.
> 


----
Ivan Herman, W3C
Digital Publishing Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704