- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 23:44:52 -0700
- To: Christian Stockwell <cstock@microsoft.com>
- CC: Alex Danilo <alex@abbra.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 03/29/2011 10:23 PM, Christian Stockwell wrote: > > I think I may be misunderstanding the intent of word-wrap: hyphenate. My understanding > was that word-wrap: hyphenate would be similar to word-wrap: break-word in that an > arbitrary spot in the text would be selected for hyphenation as to minimize whitespace. > What you're describing is that word-wrap: hyphenate is actually an alternative > mechanism to opt into the equivalent of "hyphens: auto" for a single word. > > If that's the case, it seems like we've already solved this problem through the use of > the hyphenation-limit-zone property (e.g. set the hyphenation zone width to be 99% and > authors may have a solution to this corner case). That's an interesting hack. :) We'll have to ask the working group if they prefer that. > If this corner case problem is adequately solved by hyphenation zone we can avoid > getting embroiled in specifying exactly what it means to "influence" word breaks > without "controlling" them (as used in the editor's draft). It says "influencing" without "forbidding", not "influencing" without "controlling". Here's the example: 'hyphenate-limit-chars' could say that the word is not allowed to break within the first or last 3 characters. If we had a word that was 8 characters long, and 2 characters overflowed, we'd therefore prefer a break somewhere in the middle if the word rather than towards the end. But if the word was 5 characters long and the only break blocked by hyphenate-limit-chars, we'd break there anyway because otherwise we'd overflow. You try to honor the limits if you can, but you break the rules before you give up and overflow. ~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 30 March 2011 06:45:30 UTC