Re: Float and overflow for rtl was (Re: [CSSWG] Minutes and Resolutions 2009-12-02])

Salar wrote:

CC: CSSWG list.

(snip)
> I thing the change of overflowing behavior is not expected, as i've
> mentioned in the first post, actually start/end doesn't introduce new
> behavior, they are just new new values to set the existing behaviour in an
> easy way.
(snip)
> 
> Regards,
> Salar

Salar,


I would like you to imagine a book opened. The open folio of a book 
(verso and recto) equates to the body element.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recto-verso>

Now we come across one page that has a gatefold or foldout spread.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_(typography)>

In a book written in English, you would expect the foldout to be folded 
out from the recto.

   verso     recto
[--------][---xxxxx]
[--------][---xxxxx]
[--------][---xxxxx]
[--------][---xxxxx]


Folded out.


   verso     recto
[--------][--------|xxxxx]
[--------][--------|xxxxx]
[--------][--------|xxxxx]
[--------][--------|xxxxx]


The question I would like to ask you or anyone else who is accustomed to 
books with rtl text is would the foldout to be folded out from the verso?

        verso     recto
[xxxxx|--------][--------]
[xxxxx|--------][--------]
[xxxxx|--------][--------]
[xxxxx|--------][--------]


If so, then what we see in Firefox (from at least Gecko 1.8 around 2006) 
and IE8 would seem correct.

This is similar to the case with a very long URI, and without any 
floated content.

<http://css-class.com/test/css/bidi/log-uri-normal-overflow-ltr.htm>

<http://css-class.com/test/css/bidi/log-uri-normal-overflow-rtl.htm>


If normal overflow works like this for rtl, then I would think that 
float and overflow should work like wise.


        [=====BODY=RTL=====]

[-------------------------]
[              float:right]
[-------------------------]

[-------------------------]
[              float:start]
[-------------------------]

        [------------------]
        [float:left        ]
        [------------------]

        [------------------]
        [float:end         ]
        [------------------]

        [=====BODY=RTL=====]


In saying this, users who are accustom to rtl who are web literate may 
be use to the old and non standard IE7- treatment of overflow and 
direction of scrolling for rtl even though the CSS2.1 specs say the 
opposite.

<http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visuren.html#direction>

# This property specifies the base writing direction
# of blocks and the direction of embeddings and
# overrides (see 'unicode-bidi') for the Unicode
# bidirectional algorithm. In addition, it specifies
# the direction of table column layout, the
# *direction of horizontal overflow*, and the position
# of an incomplete last line in a block in case of
# 'text-align: justify'.


To my knowledge, overflow or scrolling is not defined in the HTML4.01 
specs. This maybe in HTML5.

<http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224/struct/dirlang.html>


-- 
Alan http://css-class.com/

Received on Friday, 4 December 2009 08:54:22 UTC