- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 12:35:39 -0800
- To: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
- CC: www-style@w3.org
On 11/10/2010 11:34 AM, John Daggett wrote: > > * We resolved to remove 'horizontal-bt' as a value for writing-mode Removed. > * Section 7 still contains wording that implies vague things about the "logicalness" of width/height. > In 7.1: > >> The height properties (‘height’, ‘min-height’, and ‘max-height’) >> refer to the physical height, and the width properties (‘width’, >> ‘min-width’, and ‘max-width’) refer to the physical width. However, >> the rules used to calculate the height and width are logical: the >> height calculation rules in [CSS21] are used for the logical height >> (which could be either the physical height or physical width). >> Likewise the width calculation rules in [CSS21] are used for the >> logical width. >> >> As a corollary, percentages on the margin and padding properties, >> which are calculated with respect to the containing block width >> regardless of their dimension, are calculated with respect to the >> logical width of the containing block. This section is explaining how the CSS2.1 box model applies to vertical writing modes. If you feel there is insufficient detail on how this works ("vague things"), please explain exactly what information you feel is missing. But it has nothing to do with the logicalness of any properties. > I'm not entirely clear what 7.2.2 implies about existing properties > that have directional dependencies. So 'left' and 'right' for > text-align will effectively map to start and end? Would it be better > to add explicit 'start' and 'end' values? Ditto for float/clear. I > also think vertical-align needs to be flushed out more explicitly. Please read the Line Orientation section: http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/csswg/css3-writing-modes/Overview.html?rev=1.40&content-type=text/html;%20charset=iso-8859-1#line-orientation It defines the terms "line right", "line left", "over", and "under". The line right and line left directions are not equivalent to start and end. Note: Linking to the CVS version because Bert's postprocess script is broken. :/ > Sections 7.2.3 and 7.2.4 seem like they should be removed for now. I strongly disagree that 7.2.3 should be removed. The mapping of CSS2.1's layout rules and property definitions to the appropriate behavior in vertical layout depends on this mapping (which is defined in earlier sections). Removing this summary table, which make it easier to see the effect of those definitions in different writing modes, seems like an absurd request. As for 7.2.4, I don't understand why you think it should be removed. Distinguishing between the physical behavior of box-shadow offsets vs. the logical behavior of the 'vertical-align' property seems like a useful thing to be pointing out. > Maybe the two "examples" V and VI would be better as diagrams in the > section 2? Possibly. But they also diagram the terms "logical height" and "logical width", which aren't introduced until section 7. ~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 11 November 2010 20:36:15 UTC