- From: Peter Flynn <pflynn@imbolc.ucc.ie>
- Date: 16 Aug 1997 12:14:06 +0100
- To: clive@typonaut.demon.co.uk
- Cc: www-html@w3.org
Isn't that reason enough for inclusion? Not really. Presentational details like this belong in a stylesheet. Haven't a clue here either, but I see no reason why type should not = be "rotatable", perhaps in increments of 90=B0. If multilayering makes sense then so too does angled type. Ditto. ///Peter
Received on Saturday, 16 August 1997 07:12:41 UTC