- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 23:42:24 -0800
- To: "Aharon (Vladimir) Lanin" <aharon@google.com>
- CC: W3C style mailing list <www-style@w3.org>, "public-i18n-bidi@w3.org" <public-i18n-bidi@w3.org>
On 12/15/2010 02:11 PM, Aharon (Vladimir) Lanin wrote: > Currently, the CSS Writing Modes Module Level 3 spec on text direction > <http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-writing-modes/#text-direction> states: > > I think that these parts of the spec needs to be tweaked in several respects: > > 1. There is no reason to mention rule P1 when describing how unicode-bidi:plaintext affects the base directionality of each > paragraph. P1 deals with how the text is split up into paragraphs, not with the direction of each paragraph, and applies to > all content, regardless of unicode-bidi:plaintext. Hm, good point. Fixed. > 2. I think it would improve clarity to mention the unicode-bidi:plaintext exception when first describing how the paragraph > embedding level is set (first quote above). Thus, the last sentence of the first quote should read: > > "The paragraph embedding level is set according to the value of the ‘direction’ property of the containing block, unless the > containing block element has unicode-bidi:plaintext, in which case it is set according to the heuristic given in steps P2 and > P3 of the Unicode algorithm." I am.. less sure of this. I prefer to have unicode-bidi: plaintext to be described as an exception to the general rule than to have it be described as some kind of determining switch. Anyway, I've added some clarifying wording. > 3. We must probably explicitly define the effect of a paragraph break > [when it splits an embedding inline] > The overall direction of both paragraphs is ltr (P2 and P3 are overridden), > and since the paragraph break resets all embedding levels, the [PDF] is > orphaned, and the question mark winds up to the right of "EB OT TON RO". Good point. I've added text to this effect. > Does a line break does result in anonymous boxes? No, just more line boxes. :) > 4. When the path from the containing block element to the paragraph break includes an element with unicode-bidi:isolate, there > is no reason to go back all the way to the containing block element to get the new paragraph's base direction and the > embeddings to be reconstituted at its start. Instead of referring to the containing block element, the spec should be > referring to the closest unicode-bidi:isolate ancestor or containing block element, whichever is closer. Good point. I've updated the spec for this, too. ~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 24 February 2011 07:43:03 UTC