- From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
- Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 21:19:23 -0700
- To: "MURATA Makoto \(FAMILY Given\)" <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>, <www-style@w3.org>
-------------------------------------------------- From: "MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)" <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp> Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2010 7:28 PM To: <www-style@w3.org> Subject: Re: [css3-text-layout] margin-before/after/start/end etc. and :ttb pseudo-classes > Andrew, > > We still have to choose either or both of a) stylesheets or b) documents > for specifying directions. Having both a) and b) has advantages as well > as disadvantages such as complexities. Although some content is written > assuming vertical directions, I am tempted to choose a) even if some > content is tied to a particular writing direction, since a) hits more than > 80%. > After all, stylesheets can be used only when we give up contents such as > "See page 31" and "See above". > I am not sure I understand what is the problem and what complexities you are talking about. I do know that "let's just quadruple number of dimensional CSS properties" *will* increase complexity of the whole system... Ok, back to :ltr/:ttb. p:ltr and p:ttb are just advices like: this <p> element is now in LTR or TTB environment. Not less not more. If needed you can ignore such advices and use something like: html[enforced-dir="ttb"] * { direction: ttb; block-flow: horizontal; } or html[enforced-dir="ltr"] * { direction: ltr; block-flow: vertical; } or any other form of enforcements available in CSS, e.g. !important in UA's and user's sheets. That would be close to "dirty hack" of course but if you do need this for your user's good ... -- Andrew Fedoniouk http://terrainformatica.com
Received on Sunday, 6 June 2010 04:19:53 UTC