W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 2013

RE: [css3-writing-modes] inconsistent handling of 'Tr' codepoints in 'text-orientation'

From: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2013 11:42:32 -0400
To: Sylvain Galineau <galineau@adobe.com>
CC: W3C Style <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <A592E245B36A8949BDB0A302B375FB4E7CC8BAEA46@MAILR001.mail.lan>
> >It's implementers and implementers. On one side, two implementers said
> >it's hard, so we added option B. On the other side, two implementers
> >said they'd favor option A. One of them said he has already implemented
> >option A.
> I do not think your role as editor is to log every implementor preference and spec it as an
> alternative. It is a very bad idea for specs to offer implementors equally conformant option
> as this results in incompatibility for content and authors.

I completely agree with your statement on the editor's role, and the second sentence as well.

This is the case where all agreed that the incompatibility caused by the difference is very subtle, almost unnoticeable, and will be completely gone when user use the right fonts.

The costs to implement vary by underlying architecture. For one architecture, option A is much cheaper, while for another architecture, it's opposite.

Having two options help both implementers, while we lose almost zero, compatibility in the real world isn't sacrificed, only tests might fail, and some does care passing tests.

That is why I'm asking, why John thinks we should remove option A.


Received on Wednesday, 2 October 2013 15:43:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:35 UTC