- From: João Eiras <joao-c-eiras@telecom.pt>
- Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 17:57:55 +0000
- To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
> I've applied the filter of only documenting what appears to be
> interoperably implemented, dropping things like the <string> value
> that are not (I'm willing to consider such forward looking features
> for CSS4-UI).
Hi.
I strongly suggest including <string> values in the specification. Else, it is not multi lingual.
Many non latin scripts use something else than 3 dots for the same effect as an ellipsis.
A single 3-dot ellipsis is also not a bullet proof solution. The author might wish to use "(...)" for instance in citations, or use the vertical ellipsis in maths.
However, the string value for text-overflow should have the same syntax as the content rule, which makes the subject complex.
The author might want to use an image, css counters, or read an attribute.
Consider for instance, the case of a multi lingual document, with several truncated paragraphs with different scripts, and each script with its own ellipsis.
<style>p.truncated {text-overflow:attr(data-ellipsis)}</style>
<p class="truncated" data-ellipsis="…">Text in latin script</p>
<p class="truncated" data-ellipsis="ฯ">Text in thai script</p>
<p class="truncated" data-ellipsis="ຯ">Text in laotian script</p>
<p class="truncated" data-ellipsis="⋯⋯">Text in chinese script</p>
You could argue that that could be achieved with CSS, true, but it's about covering more valid use cases, and in the case of websites where users produce content, like wikis, editing CSS is less likely.
Perhaps I'm thinking too much ahead already, but I hope you understand the idea.
Thanks.
Received on Wednesday, 16 February 2011 17:58:30 UTC