- From: Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com>
- Date: Sat, 28 May 2011 03:36:36 +1000
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- CC: www-style@w3.org
On 24/05/2011 2:29 AM, fantasai wrote: > On 05/23/2011 02:29 AM, Alan Gresley wrote: >> >> Why does the draft spec avoid start and end values. I know that 'beas' >> didn't quite work but I do believe in is safe to use start and end >> values for margin, border, padding and text-align on both inline-level >> and block-level elements. > > The CSSWG resolved not to introduce logical properties for margin, border, > and padding in this draft. > > 'text-align: start' is covered in CSS3 Text. > > ~fantasai I understand what the CSSWG resolved but logical properties only came into crises since logical values for before and after in vertical Mongolian-based writing mode did not make sense when it's block flow direction is 180 degree different to it's line orientation of the glyphs. There are still line-relative directions such as line left and line right. These are logical ways of understanding vertical writing mode, in both cases (CJK and Mongolian), the line-left is to the start side and line-right is to the end side of the inline base direction. Logical values for start and end have no great benefit in horizontal bidirectional text (LTR with RTL or visa verso) but they have a huge benefit in vertical text. A width (logical) is easy conceptualized as height (measure) since you only swapping the x and y axises but left and right run along these axises. Are you expecting authors of CJK and Mongolian to tilt there head towards the right until they mentally perceived left as the start side and right as the end side. Do authors of horizontal text have to do something similar? -- Alan Gresley http://css-3d.org/ http://css-class.com/
Received on Friday, 27 May 2011 17:37:05 UTC