Re: [css-ruby] What does it mean for "ruby-position: inter-character" to force writing-mode to be vertical?

Personally, I think it bad design to have a value of ruby-position
indirectly mutate writing-mode. IMO, it would be better to do nothing, and
simply ignore that value (or use a default) if writing mode isn't already
vertical.

On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 3:36 PM, Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>
wrote:
>
> The CSS Ruby spec has the following text about ruby-position's
> "inter-character" value:
>
>   # "inter-character"
>   #   [...] This value forces the 'writing-mode' of the
>   #   ruby annotation to be vertical.
> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-ruby/#valdef-ruby-position-inter-character
> (Note: 'writing-mode' is a link to the definition of that CSS property.)
>
> This spec text needs some clarification, I think. In particular, the
> following things are unclear to me:
>
>  (1) Does this spec-text influence the *computed value* of the
> 'writing-mode' property? (I hope not; there's added complexity when
> properties influence other properties' computed values on the same
> element.)
>
>  (2) If the answer to (1) is "yes" (I hope not): is this "writing-mode"
> computed-value influence restricted to elements with "display:
> ruby-text", or does this influence happen regardless of "display"?  e.g.
> would <div style="display:block; ruby-position: inter-character"> be
> forced to have a vertical writing-mode?
>
>  (3) Which 'writing-mode' value should we actually use?  There are two
> distinct vertical values for the "writing-mode" property: "vertical-rl"
> and "vertical-lr" -- which of those should we use here?  (In practice,
> maybe it doesn't matter, because elsewhere the spec says "There are no
> line breaking opportunities within inter-character annotations", and I
> think the "rl" vs. "lr" distinction would only matter if there are
> linebreaks. Still -- we should explicitly mention that here,
> particularly if we're linkifying 'writing-mode' to point to the
> property-definition, because otherwise it just seems vague.)
>
>  (4) Does this "forcing" apply to descendants of the ruby annotation?
> e.g. if a ruby annotation has a child with "display:inline-block", is
> that child *also* forced to have a vertical writing-mode?  (If the child
> isn't forced: does it still get a vertical writing mode by default,
> somehow? Presumably not through inheritance, unless the answer to (1)
> was "yes".)
>
> Thanks,
> ~Daniel
>
>