- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 09:31:45 +0900
- To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Friday 2009-02-27 11:10 +0100, Michael Jansson wrote: > I'm still trying to understand the line layout formatting that is > described by CSS 2.1. Having read Mike Eric Meyer's inline formatting > model 'cheat sheet' at http://meyerweb.com/eric/css/inline-format.html, > I believe it describes what most browsers do (more or less), but I don't > like what I see from a typographical point of view. Between CSS 2.1 and what I think you're proposing, there's a tradeoff between having the model produce results that don't cause horrible overlapping when the exact fonts the author expected aren't present and producing evenly spaced lines. In terms of the line-box-contain property described in the draft at http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-linebox/#line-box-contain what CSS 2.1 specifies is 'block inline replaced', the browser quirks mode behavior is 'font replaced'. I'm not exactly sure which behavior you're proposing ('block replaced'? 'block font replaced'?). However, I think there are values, such as 'block font replaced' that make a reasonable compromise between both sides of this tradeoff: they tend both to avoid unintended overlapping and to produce evenly spaced lines when possible. I think for Web compatibility we're pretty constrained as far as changing the default behavior here. I'm also not a big fan of mode-switching properties (despite having proposed this one a long time ago). I'd also note that I don't think we want to cater for the "exact positioning" use case, especially when unknown fonts are being used. (But even with downloadable fonts, there are likely to be differences between systems.) -David -- L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ Mozilla Corporation http://www.mozilla.com/
Received on Tuesday, 3 March 2009 00:32:22 UTC