W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > January to March 2014

Re: [css3-writing-modes] i18n-ISSUE-279: text-combine-horizontal & full/half-width characters

From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 15:05:02 +0000
Message-ID: <5332EC9E.3050600@w3.org>
To: www-style@w3.org, www International <www-international@w3.org>
Section 9.1.3.1 Full-width Characters
http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/CR-css-writing-modes-3-20140320/#text-combine-fullwidth

I still find this a little confusing in the CR version of the spec.  I 
think the phrase:

" when the combined text consists of more than one character, then any 
full-width characters must first be converted to their non-full-width 
equivalents"

suggests, with the example that follows, and that uses 
text-combine-upright: digits 2;, that ordinary full-width characters in 
the content are affected by the digits keyword. Whereas, i suspect that 
what is meant is

" when the combined text consists of more than one character, then any 
properties that would display non-full-width characters as full-width 
characters must be disabled by text-combine-upright"

Having said that, I don't think that the description of 
text-combine-upright:all is terribly clear.  It says:

"Attempt to typeset horizontally all consecutive characters within the 
box such that they take up the space of a single character within the 
vertical line box."

but I think it should probably say "all consecutive non-full-width 
characters" shouldn't it?

I'm hoping I've correctly understood the intent here.

RI



On 31/07/2013 13:40, Richard Ishida wrote:
> text-combine-horizontal
> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-writing-modes/#text-combine-horizontal
>
> The digits <integer>? description says:
> "Within the element, each maximal sequence of consecutive ASCII digits
> (U+0030–U+0039) ..."
>
> But later we read:
> "any full-width characters must first be converted to their
> non-full-width equivalents by reversing the algorithm defined for
> ‘text-transform: full-width’ in [CSS3TEXT]"
>
> Which seems to imply that full-width characters are also affected by the
> digits value. If so, the range of codepoints should be extended.
>
> And if so, what about the range of half-width digits? Are they also
> included? If so, they should probably also be converted to ASCII
> characters like full-width ones.
>
> Or is this just another confusion caused by loose use of the term
> 'character', meaning here glyph?
>
Received on Wednesday, 26 March 2014 15:05:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 21 September 2016 22:37:36 UTC