W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 2012

Re: [css3-text] text-emphasis-position

From: Florian Rivoal <florianr@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 10:10:04 +0200
To: www-style@w3.org, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Message-ID: <op.wdxia2bb4p7avi@localhost.localdomain>
On Fri, 04 May 2012 22:04:23 +0200, fantasai  
<fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:

> On 05/04/2012 11:28 AM, Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu wrote:
>> (12/05/04 21:34), Florian Rivoal wrote:
>>> As the spec says, the preferred value of text-emphasis-position is
>>> language dependent ('above right' for Japanese, 'below right' for
>>> Chinese).
>>> Because of that, I think we should also accept 'auto', and use it as
>>> the default value. When the language is not known, it would do the
>>> same as the current default ('above right'), but if the language is
>>> known, it would switch to the appropriate behavior.
>>> What do you think?
>> This was previously a complex matrix[1] where there's even differences
>> between Simplified Chinese ('below right') and Traditional Chinese
>> ('above right'). Given that encoding this logic into a CSS value is a
>> pain, I think keeping the current initial value as it is is better. And
>> we can debate this at the default UA style sheet level if we want.
>> My personal opinion is that we probably shouldn't have this difference
>> in the default UA style sheet either. Chinese authors don't use emphasis
>> dots as much as Japanese authors, and I haven't seen a Chinese book with
>> emphasis dots for a while. On the other hand, you see quite a lot of
>> emphasis dots in Japanese manga.
> I agree with Kenny on this point: the initial value should just be
> 'above right'. I don't have much of an opinion on the UA stylesheet
> part, but that's an informative appendix for a reason.
>> The remaining question is whether we should make authors who prefer
>> underlining emphasis dots happy by making 'text-emphasis-position' part
>> of the 'text-emphasis' shorthand. I have no strong opinion about this at
>> the moment.
> text-emphasis-position, like text-underline-position, should *not* be
> reset by the shorthand, and it is designed to inherit independently
> very intentionally. Authors should be able to set this once on the
> root element (or set it using [lang] selectors) and let that take care
> of the position: if the shorthand resets it, then the author has to
> explicitly reset it correctly *every time* they set an underline or
> emphasis mark on an element.
> I'm rejecting both comments as No Change. Let me know if you disagree.

I am satisfied with the answers.

  - Florian
Received on Monday, 7 May 2012 08:10:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:16 UTC