- From: Gérard Talbot <www-style@gtalbot.org>
- Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 22:50:34 -0400
- To: "John Daggett" <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
Le Lun 13 mai 2013 22:32, "Gérard Talbot" a écrit : > > Le Lun 13 mai 2013 22:04, John Daggett a écrit : >> >> >> fantasai wrote: >> >>> The CSS3 Fonts module offers a 'font-variant-position' property as >>> an improved substitute for superscripts and subscripts. The goal is, >>> I hope, that going forward, authors would use this mechanism to >>> produce "real" superscripts and subscripts, using correctly-adjusted >>> glyphs from the font rather than manually synthesizing them by means >>> of 'vertical-align' and 'font-size' adjustments. >> >> This 'font-variant-position' property [1] is not a replacement for the >> existing subscript/superscript mechanism in HTML which uses a >> combination of 'font-size' > > Most browsers use in their user agent style sheet: > > sub, sup {font-size: smaller;} > /* though Appendix D gives small, sub, sup {font-size: .83em} */ > >> and 'vertical-align' to render elements in >> superscripts and subscripts. >> >> We discussed this in great detail in the past and actually resolved on >> this at the Hamburg F2F [2]: >> >>> - RESOLVED: the 'font-variant-position' property is defined independent >>> of the existing use of the font-size/vertical-align >>> properties >>> to synthesize subscripts/superscripts >> >> The use of variant glyphs for superscripts and subscripts doesn't >> allow for nested superscripts and subscripts, nor does it allow for >> images or other elements included in the superscript or subscript >> content. It's use is limited to simple, typographic superscripts and >> subscripts that match the surrounding text. >> >>> There's a problem with this however, which is that, since it's now >>> just done by glyph substitution, the text-decoration code doesn't >>> know about it, and can't draw underlines, strike-throughs, or >>> overlines correctly. >> >> I think you're misrepresenting "correct" behavior here. If an author >> underlines a section of text containing a superscript or subscript and >> uses 'font-variant-position' to choose the appropriate variant glyphs, >> the text will display close to the way it does today (modulo Webkit >> text-decoration bugs): >> >> Testcase: >> http://people.mozilla.org/~jdaggett/tests/superscript-underline.html >> > > > In several places in that superscript-underline.html test page, the text > in that webpage uses/says "superscript" when in fact it should be > using/saying "subscript". > > eg. > > " > Below is a comparison of underlining of superscripts using the HTML <sup> > element > " > > should be instead > > " > Below is a comparison of underlining of subscripts using the HTML <sub> > element > " > > and > > " > if the text decoration is only applied to the superscript, > " > > should be instead > > " > if the text decoration is only applied to the subscript, > " > John, please forget the above. I have a small monitor screen and I didn't see the end of the lines when making those comments. Now, I see the superscript 5. Sorry about that. Gérard > > We created several tests in bugzilla bug report (starting from comment #7) > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=695442#c7 > > >> Rendering in Firefox on OSX: >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2013May/att-0025/superscript-underline.png >> >> If an author wants to underline *just* the content in the superscript >> or subscript span, the baseline for the variant glyphs is the same as >> the surrounding text and the underline will appear at the same place >> it does for surrounding text. The same is true Unicode >> superscript/subscript codepoints (U+2070:209C), they are treated as >> glyphs with the same baseline as surrounding text (see Wikipedia for a >> list of these [3]). This is just a limitation of using variant >> glyphs. >> >>> So, somehow, we need to have a concept of the synthesized text's >>> size and baseline, and be keying the decorations off of that. >> >> We discussed why this isn't possible at the Hamburg F2F last year. As >> John Hudson was gracious enough to point out again, there aren't >> really reliable metrics that can be used to infer the baseline of >> variant superscript/subscript glyphs. > > John, I really have to ask you this: which software do you use for > gathering typography metrics of TTF fonts under Linux (debian > distributions like Kubuntu)? > > This is something I've been looking for for months now.. > > > > > Under Windows, I use ttfdump: > > ttfdump filename -tOS/2 -nx -h > > ttfdump AHEM____.TTF -tOS/2 -nx -h > > ; TrueType v1.0 Dump Program - v1.8, Oct 29 2002, rrt, dra, gch, ddb, lcp, > pml > ; Copyright (C) 1991 ZSoft Corporation. All rights reserved. > ; Portions Copyright (C) 1991-2001 Microsoft Corporation. All rights > reserved. > > Gérard > >> I posted a discussion of this >> with examples [4] and at the F2F meeting we discussed these: >> >> Comparing synthesized superscripts/subscripts to variants >> http://people.mozilla.org/~jdaggett/tests/subsupermetrics.png >> >> If an author wants to use subscripts and superscripts that best match >> the surrounding content, the use of variant glyphs is ideal. However, >> if they want complicated presentation behavior then the existing model >> of using font-size/vertical-align is a better choice. For example, in >> the Wikipedia case where superscripts are contained in square brackets >> (e.g. [2]) and hovering over the link shows an underline, the existing >> HTML model is a better choice, since most fonts don't provide >> superscript variant glyphs for the square brackets anyways. >> >> This feature addresses the needs of a specific, common set of use >> cases. I don't think we need to try and unify it with the approach >> used in the past and the wording in the spec reflects that. >> >> Regards, >> >> John Daggett >> >> [1] font-variant-position >> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-fonts/#font-variant-position-prop >> >> [2] Hamburg F2F discussion of superscript/subscript feature >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012May/0530.html >> >> [3] Wikipedia page on superscript/subscript variant codepoints in >> Unicode >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode_subscripts_and_superscripts >> >> [4] discussion of differences between variant glyphs and HTML >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2012May/0369.html >> >> >> > > > -- > CSS 2.1 Test suite RC6, March 23rd 2011 > http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/toc.html > > Contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite > http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/ > > Web authors' contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite > http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/web-authors-contributions-css21-testsuite.html > > > -- CSS 2.1 Test suite RC6, March 23rd 2011 http://test.csswg.org/suites/css2.1/20110323/html4/toc.html Contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/ Web authors' contributions to CSS 2.1 test suite http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/web-authors-contributions-css21-testsuite.html
Received on Tuesday, 14 May 2013 02:51:12 UTC