- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 14:32:07 -0700
- To: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
- CC: www-style@w3.org
On 07/12/2012 12:46 PM, Glenn Adams wrote: > > This discussion also begs the same question about 'normal' with respect to: > > letter-spacing > line-height > word-spacing > > CSSOM Section 8 already lists line-height as using the 'used value' as the resolved value, but does not list > {letter,word}-spacing, which, by symmetry, should get the same treatment. > > I notice that these last two have different specifications for "computed value" in CSS2.1 [1]. > > for letter-spacing: > > /Computed value:/ 'normal' or absolute length > > for word-spacing: > > /Computed value:/ for 'normal' the value 0; otherwise, the absolute length > > I wonder if this is an error, i.e., that letter-spacing should specify the same definition for computed value as for > word-spacing. Does anyone know if this difference is intentional, and if so, then what is the rationale? > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/text.html#spacing-props I think the difference is that for 'letter-spacing', 'normal' and '0' have different meanings when specified: zero means justification is not allowed to change letter-spacing, whereas normal means it is allowed. CSS3 Text tracks three different values for each of letter-spacing and word-spacing, so we can have the "optimum" value compute to zero while the minimum and maximum values compute to "normal", in order to capture this difference in behavior. ~fantasai
Received on Monday, 30 July 2012 21:32:36 UTC