Re: Rotated Content

>  DG> 1. What are the reference line and direction ? Mention of bidi is
>  DG>    needed. What happens in case of vertical text ? I guess that the
>  DG>    non inheritance is here to partially solve the problem.
> I thought of it as the box being rotated, and the text keeping
> whatever properties it has inside the box. Bidirectional text might be
> a problem, but I don't see it getting much worse because that it is in
> CSS2 because of this ...
>  DG> 2. does it really apply to all elements ? If it applies to inline
>  DG>    elements, how will it affect the size of the containing box (CSS
>  DG>    has only rectangular and non rotated boxes for the moment) and
>  DG>    line height ?  How does it affect background and borders of
>  DG>    block-level elements ?  Relation with clip and overflow
>  DG>    properties ?
> As I said, the boxes are rotated, the content (including backgrounds
> etc) just follows. And only non-static boxes. Still, it will require a
> careful review of the entire text on the box model.
>  DG> 3. I don't think it should apply to a table sub-element TR TD or
>  DG> TH !
> Hmmm ... rotating a TR might not be very useful, but I think it should
> be legal. Rotating THs and TDs sounds more useful (but the same effect
> would be possible to get by including another element inside the
> TD/TH).  Is it possible (legal / implemented) to use non-static
> position on those elements now?
>  DG> 4. what is rotated ? the box or the inline data inside the box ?
> The box.
Okay, so to summarize you're talking about not rotating the fonts
themselves, but rotating "boxes" containing the font and text content?
Wouldn't it be simpler to just rotate the font?  This is what I've been
looking for to simply rotate in fixed intervals (by 45 or 90 degree angles).


Received on Tuesday, 29 June 1999 14:23:36 UTC