Re: [css-writing-modes][naming] Inheritance of text-combine

On 07/09/2013 05:45 PM, John Daggett wrote:
> fantasai wrote:
>> The earliest revisions of this feature didn't have any automatic
>> composition, and so the property did not inherit -- because it
>> indicated that the entire contents of this element should be
>> composed.
>> However, doing automatic composition requires an inherited property.
>> Although we first had only the manual composition ability, Koji and
>> I had sketched out the idea of in the future, expanding
>> 'text-combine' be a shorthand setting 'text-combine-all' and
>> 'text-combine-auto', which would introduce the auto- composition
>> abilities.
>> Since we're combining both abilities in the spec right now, I think
>> we need to make this property split now. (We will still encourage
>> authors to use the shorthand, since that will give correct behavior.)
> I'm somewhat confused, the primary use case of tatechuyoko in Japanese
> vertical text is for simple combinations of digits. Why is there a
> need for more complex composition?  Wouldn't an inline block using a
> different writing mode be equivalent?

No, it's not equivalent. The need for 'all' is to do anything other
than digits. :) Also it's being used currently for EPUB.

> I'm not at all clear as to what the "auto" vs. "manual" distinction is
> here.  You're distinguishing the behavior of the 'all' value from the
> 'digits' value?

Yes. The 'all' value needs to know what element set it, and inheriting
it confuses the issue. The 'digits' value needs to inherit to work

>> Note, we also have an open renaming issue on this property. I think
>> the top contender was 'force-horizontal'.
> I'm not a huge fan of the 'text-combine-horizontal' name but I don't
> see 'force-horizontal' as a better name.  Given the late nature of
> the spec cycle and given that IE is already planning to ship something
> called 'text-combine-horizontal' I don't think we should rename this
> property unless there's a *very* strong reason.  Right now I don't see
> that strong reason.
> We really, really, really need to stop doing property name changes
> close to LC.

It's been an open issue for awhile now. We never resolved on it.


Received on Wednesday, 10 July 2013 01:39:05 UTC