- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2018 20:18:16 +0000
- To: public-svg-issues@w3.org
The Working Group just discussed `https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/486`.
<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
<liam> Topic: https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/486<br>
<liam> Github: https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/486<br>
<liam> AmeliaBR: 2 issues here. We don't have browser support for multi-line text, and some of these only apply to that;<br>
<liam> second, some of these properties are from other css specs and have no browser support at all<br>
<liam> so this isn't only testing SVG rendering but whether they're supported in browsers at all<br>
<liam> Eric: so unless there are browsers planning to implement them...<br>
<liam> i don't think th epoint of SVG s to say, browsers you must support this property, and i dont' think authoring tools should use glyph-orientation-local<br>
<liam> s/local/vertical/<br>
<liam> AmeliaBR: there's a standard CSS way to do vertical text [and it's not this]<br>
<liam> I agree that it's already spec'd in CSS, it's an SVG legacy feature, should just point to CSS<br>
<liam> Eric; we should just say to use text orientation in tools<br>
<liam> Dirk: what about text-align-all and text-space-collapse, i don't think Illustrator does<br>
<liam> Tav: Inkscape doesn't<br>
<liam> AmeliaBR: we could say, if the UA supports the property then it should apply to SVG text<br>
<liam> and that way we can make it clear we don't want browsers adding support for CSS & not adding it to SVG<br>
<liam> Dirk: i'd rather deprecate them<br>
<liam> AmeliaBR: I'm talking about the new features too, e.g. text-align-all, 'cos different specs complete at different times<br>
<liam> Dirk: should be in css text, not svg<br>
<liam> AmeliaBR: we have this list (1) to say that non-browser svg environments, thisis the relevant subset of css, and (2) if browsers are implementing it these also apply to SVG<br>
<liam> Dirk: {it's at risk though, we can drop it]<br>
<liam> AmeliaBR: or make it an informative note, to say, when implemented they should also apply to svg<br>
<liam> Dirk: that's up to CSS text<br>
<liam> Eric: i want to go with Amelia's suggestion, a note; i can't write a test for it but it makes sense<br>
<liam> Tav: i think we could just drop these two properties as being required for SVG<br>
<liam> [Liam and Dirk have brief aside about whether SVG should identify relevant CSS properties & say how they apply or whether CSS must say it for all specs]<br>
<liam> Dirk: i'd rather have any issues against it fixed in CSS not SVG<br>
<liam> and even something informative can't be tested, and isn't helping<br>
<liam> Decision: drop text-align-all and text-space-collapse<br>
<liam> AmeliaBR: for the rest of this list, are there any objections, any other ways to handle?<br>
<liam> Eric: glyph-orientation-vertical<br>
<liam> Tav: didn't we keep that because of Adobe?<br>
<liam> Eric: SVG 2 is about new content not legacy<br>
<liam> Tav: people don't expect their files ot break<br>
<liam> AmeliaBR: we don't want anyone to remove support, but user agents that never had support for the legacy property shouldn't be required to add it in; CSS lists it as optional<br>
<liam> krit: i just checked and we support it because there's no CSS replacement for lyph-orientation-vertical yet in some cases<br>
<liam> so there's a requirement tosupport this<br>
<liam> ericwilligers: right-angles only?<br>
<liam> krit: yes<br>
<liam> krit: fine with dropping once there's an alternative but so far we can't export everything as SVG using CSS<br>
<liam> Tav: in CSS can only do sideways one way<br>
<liam> Dirk: so no way to vertically align letters below one another [in a pile] without rotating glyphs<br>
<liam> Amelia: can do this but not upside down<br>
<AmeliaBR> https://www.w3.org/TR/css-writing-modes-3/#glyph-orientation<br>
<liam> so the CSS spec only supports some values, auto 0 and 90, but not 180 and 270<br>
<liam> Eric: so shouldn't we raise this against CSS?<br>
<liam> Dirk: I did but it was rejected by the WG<br>
<liam> AmeliaBR: we're not saying lyph-orientation-vertical should be banned; Eric's proposing to take it out of the list of required features, and even there we only require it as defined in css writing modes 3<br>
<liam> s/lyph-orientation-vertical/glyph-orientation-vertical/g<br>
<liam> but if the SVG1 glyph-orientation-vertical needs to be supported for legacy then we really do need to talk with CSS<br>
<liam> Dirk: not sure how to resolve<br>
<liam> Liam: can mark as optional and sounds like it has impln's so won't block us<br>
<liam> Dirk ideally would move to CSS text, i can take it up there<br>
<liam> AmeliaBR: i can't support saying, use the definition from css 1 and not the definition from css 3<br>
<liam> Liam: difficulty might be CSS treats rotated glyphs for i18n purposes not drawing<br>
<liam> AmeliaBR: SVG has other ways to draw upside down piles of glyphs, bt if Adobe s/w is still outputting content that expects the SVG 1 def to be supported, that's for Dirk to raise an issue on CSS<br>
<liam> as far as what we should do, i still think we should make it clear that we're deferring to css writing modes, and right ow css writing modes says, even for the modes still supported, old property names are an optional feature<br>
<liam> Dirk: CSS WG deprecated properties in the past & have specialized others, so ideally it'd move to a text alignment spec<br>
<liam> i'll take it up with the CSS WG<br>
<liam> AmeliaBR: all other props have 2 implementations<br>
<liam> so not process blockers<br>
</details>
--
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/svgwg/issues/486#issuecomment-403606646 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 9 July 2018 20:18:19 UTC