Re: [css3-text] Splitting CSS Text into Level 3 and Level 4

fantasai wrote:

> > I've made a little draft of what the proposed @text-transform could look like,
> > and how it would be used to solve the use cases we've discussed so far:
> >
> > http://wiki.csswg.org/ideas/at-text-transform
> >
> > This is a first try, so I am sure that a lot of things can be tweaked, but
> > I think that this illustrates that a generic mechanism:
> >
> > 1) wouldn't be very hard to spec
> > 2) wouldn't be very hard to use
> > 3) could be used by authors to solve many more use cases that
> > the ones th WG has identified and understands well
> 
> Florian, thank you for taking on the job of drawing up this proposal.
> I agree we should pursue this. However, the intention of splitting
> the draft between Level 3 and Level 4 is to focus on the existing set
> of more stable features in order to stabilize them for unprefixing. I
> think it is best for us to focus on those features so that we can get
> them to CR rather than being sidetracked by what we want to work on
> next.
> 
> There will always be a feature that we think is exciting and urgent
> and want to add to a late-stage draft, but this is not a way to make
> progress in shipping things. If the existing draft precludes adding
> the new feature, then we should consider holding back, but in this
> case nothing in the current design prevents us from adding
> @text-transform later.

This was not proposed as an exciting new feature, it was proposed as a
more flexible alternative to the 'full-size-kana' value of the
'text-transform' property in CSS3 Text.  Several members of the group,
myself included, have objected to adding 'full-size-kana' on multiple
occasions.  This is clearly an issue which should be marked in the
spec (it still isn't) and we should try to figure out a solution.

If getting the spec to rec is your main concern, then I suggest we go
with a very simple definition of @text-transform for now, get rid of
'full-size-kana' and resolve this issue.  I agree we can extend the
feature in a later module.

As a general principle I think we should always be looking for more
flexible approaches to problems, especially where internationalization
issues are concerned.  Those are often hard to understand and get
right on the first pass so I think it's better to take an approach
that permits incremental improvements.

Regards,

John Daggett

Received on Thursday, 8 December 2011 13:39:10 UTC