- From: Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu <kennyluck@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 05:03:35 +0900
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- CC: ML public-i18n-core <public-i18n-core@w3.org>, CJK discussion <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>, WWW Style <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <4D5C2D97.2010805@w3.org>
(11/02/17 4:33), fantasai wrote: > [snip] > I am not sure if text-transform: fullwidth should affect U+0020. It > makes sense to me > either way. I tried some examples and found it weird to have U+0020 in between two fullwidth Latin characters. I'll be interested in seeing a real world example and its use case. Perhaps I am missing something. Cheers, Kenny -------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: [css3-text] Does text-transform:fullwidth transform U+0020 SPACE characters as well? Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 11:02:52 +0000 Resent-From: www-style@w3.org Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 06:01:02 -0500 From: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp> To: www-style@w3.org <www-style@w3.org> CC: ML public-i18n-core (public-i18n-core@w3.org) <public-i18n-core@w3.org> I sent this to Japanese ML too where I got one feedback: if text-transform:fullwidth does affect U+0020, would it run first or would white space processing[1] run first? I assume white space processing runs first, but we should probably add this to the spec to make it clear. [1] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-text/#white-space-processing Regards, Koji -----Original Message----- From: Koji Ishii Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2011 4:02 PM To: www-style@w3.org Cc: ML public-i18n-core (public-i18n-core@w3.org) Subject: [css3-text] Does text-transform:fullwidth transform U+0020 SPACE characters as well? The question came up during the test case development/review[1] for text-transform:fullwidth[2]. Unicode defines U+3000 IDEOGRAPHIC SPACE is the full-width counterpart of U+0020 SPACE, so I guess it should be done. The primary use case for the property value is to typeset Latin characters and digits like ideographic characters as written in the spec, so transforming U+0020 to U+3000 makes sense to me given the use case. But U+0020 is a little special in HTML/CSS and therefore I'd like to confirm if doing so doesn't harm anything badly. Any opinions appreciated. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-css-testsuite/2011Feb/0072.html [2] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-text/#text-transform Regards, Koji
Received on Wednesday, 16 February 2011 20:03:21 UTC