- From: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
- Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 17:48:59 -0500
- To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
I had discussion on punctuation-trim with Murakami-san and fantasai, sending them to the ML for the record and for anyone else to jump in. -----Original Message----- From: Koji Ishii Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 10:12 AM To: MURAKAMI Shinyu Cc: fantasai (fantasai@inkedblade.net) Subject: punctuation-trim Murakami-san, I think we need to finalize how to incorporate Kida-san's requests. I should have done this earlier and I'm sorry about that. You might have already knew, currently Kida-san's requests differ from what are written in the spec in: * Wants to set/reset "start" separately without touching other settings * Wants to use "allow-end" as initial value, and user can't change it (at least for now) * Wants to use "adjacent" as initial value, and user can't change it (at least for now) So the proposal would be: punctuation-trim-start: none | start -- none as initial punctuation-trim-end: none | end | allow-end -- allow-end as initial punctuation-trim-adjacent: none | adjacent -- adjacent as initial punctuation-trim shortcut for the above three or create three properties without shortcut: punctuation-trim-start: none | force -- none as initial punctuation-trim-end: none | force | allow -- allow as initial punctuation-trim-adjacent: none | force -- force as initial How does this look to you? One issue left is making allow-end and adjacent as initial value, which other vendors may or may not like to follow. I haven't talked about this with Elika yet, I guess we could add "auto" as an UA dependent value if that's required by other vendors. Thoughts? -----Original Message----- From: MURAKAMI Shinyu [mailto:murakami@antenna.co.jp] Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 11:42 AM To: Koji Ishii Cc: fantasai (fantasai@inkedblade.net) Subject: Re: punctuation-trim Koji, > So the proposal would be: > punctuation-trim-start: none | start -- none as initial > punctuation-trim-end: none | end | allow-end -- allow-end as initial > punctuation-trim-adjacent: none | adjacent -- adjacent as initial > punctuation-trim shortcut for the above three > > or create three properties without shortcut: > punctuation-trim-start: none | force -- none as initial > punctuation-trim-end: none | force | allow -- allow as initial > punctuation-trim-adjacent: none | force -- force as initial > > How does this look to you? I think the former (with shorthand) is better than the latter (without shorthand). > > One issue left is making allow-end and adjacent as initial value, which other vendors may or may not like to follow. I haven't talked about this with Elika yet, I guess we could add "auto" as an UA dependent value if that's required by other vendors. I think the initial value allow-end/adjacent are better than the UA dependent "auto", and when the punctuation-trim feature is implemented by many UAs, all such UAs should have same good default behavior. -- MURAKAMI Shinyu http://twitter.com/MurakamiShinyu Antenna House Formatter: http://www.antennahouse.com -----Original Message----- From: Koji Ishii Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 1:18 PM To: 'MURAKAMI Shinyu' Cc: 'fantasai (fantasai@inkedblade.net)' Subject: RE: punctuation-trim Actually, I find myself having 4 more proposals :) 1. "no-start" etc. over "none" "none" in this form isn't very useful; rather they should be "no-start" etc. This allows shorthand to specify which one to disable. 2. text-justify:trim could be misused Elika asked me about this, I thought I didn't like it first time I heard as "trim" is a property of justification, but then I changed my mind because there are pages in the wild that already have "text-justify:inter-ideograph", and they would turn off "trim" unwillingly. So the proposal to solve this is to add "punctuation-trim-justify: no-justify | justify" instead. 3. "force" could be more special than "allow" Given these changes, and also considering feature extensions, we might use more "allow" than "force". So, I'd like "end" be "force-end" and "allow-end" be "end". If we were to add what In Design has, it might be something like: punctuation-trim-kana: 0% 10% /* means Kana can compress from 0% to 10% */ In this sense, using "force" keyword to force the trim might make more sense. 4. "text-trim" rather than "punctuation-trim" Adobe has asked to extend this feature to what they have in In Design. Word already has a feature to trim Kana on justify. That makes me think that "punctuation-trim" could be too specific. How do you think about "text-trim" instead? So, if you like all these proposals, it would look like: text-trim-start: no-start | force-start -- no-start as initial text-trim-end: no-end | end | force-end -- end as initial text-trim-adjacent: no-adjacent | force-adjacent -- force-adjacent as initial text-trim-justify: no-justify | justify -- justify as default text-trim shorthand for the above three You can pick up which one you like and dislike of course. -----Original Message----- From: fantasai [mailto:fantasai@inkedblade.net] Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 5:05 PM To: Koji Ishii Cc: MURAKAMI Shinyu Subject: Re: punctuation-trim On 01/12/2011 08:12 PM, Koji Ishii wrote: > Actually, I find myself having 4 more proposals :) :) > So, if you like all these proposals, it would look like: > > text-trim-start: no-start | force-start -- no-start as initial > text-trim-end: no-end | end | force-end -- end as initial > text-trim-adjacent: no-adjacent | force-adjacent -- force-adjacent as > initial > text-trim-justify: no-justify | justify -- justify as default > text-trim shorthand for the above three > > You can pick up which one you like and dislike of course. Hm, seems like a lot of properties. Although I suppose we can start by introducing just the shorthand and extending it later if needed. Murakami-san, I am not as familiar as you with the usage here. Should they all be individual controls that cascade independently, or are some better set together? ~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 13 January 2011 22:50:00 UTC