- From: Maxwell Terpstra <terpstra@myrealbox.com>
- Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2004 02:18:13 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
BACKGROUNDS module: -Section 3.6 -- What about the possibility of using a <shape> value for background-clip? This would make it more like other clipping properties, and would be more useful. The shape coordinates would be relative to the box chosen by background-origin. -Section 3.9 -- error in prose. "In the example above, the image will only repeat vertically three times" should be ".. repeat horizontally.." (repeat-x) -- clarification/re-wording needed. Misunderstandings may arise from the use of the word "repeat" which implies copies in addition to the original. (ie, does background-quantity:3; mean three _extra_ instances of the image, or three _total_ instances?) This is especially confusing in the last sentence, "The value one means the image will be repeated once." -Section 3.10 -- grammatical error in prose. 'Values of this property have the following meanings: "length"-measure that indicates the spacing of the image with regard to initial position.' Perhaps should be '"length" is a measure that indicates the spacing of the image with regard to initial position.' -- clarification needed regarding negative values. Will a negative spacing result in overlapping repetitions? FONTS module -Section 2 (Introduction) -- the note about using em as a length unit should be moved up one paragraph (since it has nothing to do with the coordinate space) -- reference made to TEXT module to define baseline-tables, but there is no link, and I could not find the string "baseline-table" anywhere in the referenced module (or even a definition of baseline for that matter). Really, since ascent and descent are defined explicitly here, so should the idea of baseline-tables. -- grammatical error. Second-to-last paragraph: "In addition, this modules specifies.." ; should be ".. this module .." -- The last paragraph (about initial and inherit values) is important, and could easily be missed or misunderstood in this context. It may be a good idea to move it somewhere else, and/or mark it up a bit to make it stand out. Also, a link should be provided to the property index table, where the meanings of 'initial' are shown. -Section 3.1 -- about midway through.. "In addition, font descriptors are used to describe the characteristics of fonts, so that a suitable font can be chosen to create the desired appearance. These font descriptors are used new font information to the font database which is built on locally available resources." The second sentence here doesn't make sense. Did this perhaps mean, "These font descriptors make use of additional information in the font database?" -- matching step 1.a. - last sentence is confusing and unneeded. -Section 3.3 -- font-variant property - does specifying small-caps imply that the font should be bicameral? Would a unicameral font-face fail the matching process if small-caps was set? This was mentioned breifly at the end of the font-variant description - "Insofar as this property causes text to be transformed to uppercase, the same considerations as for 'text-transform' apply." Need a link to the text-transform property, or the "considerations" should be restated explicitly here. -Section 4.2 -- grammatical error. "This property allows author control over applying anti-aliasing fonts when rendered." should be ".. over applying anti-aliasing to fonts .." -Section 4.3 -- not important but.. "font-emphasize" (verb form) seems weird, especially when you tack on -style and -position to it. I think it would be better as "font-emphasis" Overall, these modules are looking really good! I found that the FONT module in particular was much more understandable than it's counterpart in the CSS2 spec. Keep up the good work! Sincerely, Maxwell Terpstra
Received on Saturday, 17 July 2004 05:29:36 UTC