- From: Jeanne Spellman <jeanne@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2013 18:06:58 -0400
- To: Jim Allan <jimallan@tsbvi.edu>, UAWG <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
I agree that 0 is confusing with O depending on the font, but 0 is a very different width from M and that will put us in conflict with CSS which uses 0. I am pretty sure that other technologies also use 0 as the defining character for width. I suggest we put "0 (zero)" in the proposal. On 10/7/2013 5:38 PM, Jim Allan wrote: > References (for 1.4.3 in IER) > http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visudet.html#leading > http://www.w3.org/wiki/CSS/Properties/line-height > http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/text.html#spacing-props > http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/fonts.html#font-styling > http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/fonts.html#font-boldness > http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/text.html#lining-striking-props > http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/text.html#alignment-prop > > Table of all CSS properties http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/propidx.html > > adding a Note to 1.4.3 > Note: The unit of measure will vary by the technology. For the purposes of > UAAG 2.0, the font height should be considered to be equal to 1. The font > width of the character M (or other character commonly accepted in the > typography for that language) should be considered to be equal to 1. > > <jim in the note, 0 was confusing (as it is a zero, not an O), I changed to > an M > I added the word and character spacing, justification, bold, etc references> > > any other comments, additions, smithing??? > > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Jeanne Spellman <jeanne@w3.org> wrote: > >> As per my action item, I followed up on the text customization proposal to >> see what unit of measure was intended for 1.4.3 on line height (leading), >> character and word spacing. >> >> Results: No unit of measure was specified deliberately, because no unit >> of measure is proper usage. Examples were given of CSS and Word, which both >> accept a number without a unit of measure. >> >> I personally disagree with this. While my typography experience is quite >> dated, I have always used a unit of measure in typography. While this (no >> unit of measure) is allowed in CSS, the examples make clear that CSS2 >> considers no unit of measure as em. The calculation of line-height in CSS >> 2.1 is quite complex, and I think we should avoid it ourselves, and refer >> people to appropriate documentation. >> http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/**visudet.html#leading<http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visudet.html#leading> >> >> References (which I think we should include in the References section of >> 1.4.3 IER) >> http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/**visudet.html#leading<http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visudet.html#leading> >> http://www.w3.org/wiki/CSS/**Properties/line-height<http://www.w3.org/wiki/CSS/Properties/line-height>(some useful language here, IMO.) >> Table of all CSS properties http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/**propidx.html<http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/propidx.html> >> The spec for CSS3 is not complete and should not be referenced. The >> latest working draft (for your info) is http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-** >> text/#word-spacing <http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-text/#word-spacing> >> >> I propose adding a Note to 1.4.3 >> Note: The unit of measure will vary by the technology. For the purposes of >> UAAG 2.0, the font height should be considered to be equal to 1. The font >> width of the character 0 (or other character commonly accepted in the >> typography for that language) should be considered to be equal to 1. >> >> > > -- _______________________________ Jeanne Spellman W3C Web Accessibility Initiative jeanne@w3.org
Received on Monday, 7 October 2013 22:07:06 UTC