RE: [CSS3-text] text-underline-position and superscript

Ambrose's use case is covered by text-underline-position:under[1]. What else use cases do you have?



-----Original Message-----
From: Keiko Hiraide [] 
Sent: Monday, December 27, 2010 4:59 PM
To: Koji Ishii
Cc: Ambrose LI; Belov, Charles;
Subject: Re: [CSS3-text] text-underline-position and superscript

To make the standard simple, I assume the  properties currently proposed would be OK. But there may need some variations. I agree with Ambrose's use case  for "pixel positioning",  possiblly giving the values of <percentage> and <length>.

Thank you,

Keiko Hiraide
Antenna House, Inc. 

On Sun, 26 Dec 2010 09:22:52 -0500
Koji Ishii <> wrote:

> Thank you for your summary. Yes, the way you organized issues matches to what I think they should be.
> For issue #1, it's generalized as "underlining to text that contains multiple different properties (fonts, super/sub, etc.)", and I agree that it should be handled better. Actually it does in the current CSS3 text spec[1]. Can you please review it and see if the problem still exists?
> For issue #2, I still see the issue is the same one as Kenny brought up[2]. I'm not against the idea, I actually would like it happen, I'm just saying the issue is different from #1. I was actually hoping to write up something once I've got responses to [2] and we all have got consensus, but it didn't happen unfortunately. If you could go back to the thread and continue the discussions, that'd be helpful to make it happen.
> [1]
> [2]
> Regards,
> Koji
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ambrose LI []
> Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2010 11:00 PM
> To: Koji Ishii
> Cc: Belov, Charles;
> Subject: Re: [CSS3-text] text-underline-position and superscript
> Sorry for following up on myself again. I'll blame it being early morning, but let me reorganize myself a bit and restate how the two ideas are related:
> ==================================================
> There are two generalized principles common to Charles' and my ideas, and the two general principles are that:
> 1. We need some way to specify that, in some situations, no matter what the glyph-specific underline position is, we want to keep a constant underline position for some logical grouping of characters.
> (1a) For superscript/subscripts: underlines don't move up/down due to 
> the super/subscripting
> (1b) For Chinese: underlines don't move up/down when there are Latin 
> or other non-CJK characters in the sequence
> 2. As a corollary of the above, we need some way to specify that underlines are always visually disjoint if they are semantically marked up as separate.
> (2a) For superscripts/subscripts: The logical markup is provided by 
> SUP or SUB and we make it clear that we want the underlines to move 
> up/down along with the super/subscript
> (2b) For Chinese: The logical markup is provided by U and we make it 
> clear that the two adjacent underlines should never run into each 
> other
> (2c) The Chinese use case could also potentially be useful for 
> non-Chinese situations
> What Charles proposed are ways to specify how the constant underline position in #1 should be determined, and to specify how a non-constant underline position in #2 can be explicitly specified for superscripts and subscripts. Perhaps there can be ways to get rid of the proposed keywords, but his proposal is a good analysis (without considering the requirements for the Chinese typography) of what we will need to deal with when we need the browser to figure out a constant position for the underlining.
> Charles did not explicitly specify a use case for "pixel positioning", but I suggested it as a possible fix for incorrect underline position in Chinese. The above also shows that the counter-proposal of correcting the underline positions in CJK fonts (which still should be corrected, since this affects also word processors) alone will not be a complete fix to the Chinese problem. Personally, I envision "pixel positioning" to be usable as a workaround for both problem #1, and problem #2 when we are dealing specifically with superscripts and subscripts; it may not be a perfect solution but this could be what Charles had in mind, *especially* if you don't want the proposed additional keywords.
> --
> cheers,
> -ambrose
> does anyone know how to fix Snow Leopard? it broke input method 
> switching and is causing many typing mistakes and is very annoying

Received on Monday, 27 December 2010 08:36:49 UTC