- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 07:07:48 -0700
- To: CE Whitehead <cewcathar@hotmail.com>, Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 05/16/2014 07:58 AM, CE Whitehead wrote: > Hi, once more fantasai; I do have a bit more feedback -- more comments on: > http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-text-3/#uax29 > > 2.1 Case Transforms: the 'text-transform' property > following the list of possible values and just above "EXAMPLE 3" > > "The definition of “word“ used for capitalize is UA-dependent; [UAX29] is suggested (but not required) for determining such > word boundaries. Authors should not expect capitalize to follow language-specific titlecasing conventions (such as skipping > articles in English). " > > { COMMENT: I cannot make sense of "used for" here -- > do you mean that, > => > "for the value, 'capitalize,' what constitutes a "word" is UA-dependent?" > I assume so; you can of course leave your sentence as is -- nothing wrong with the grammar, but it jolted me reading it } Fair enough. Fixed as you suggest. :) > > * * * > 4. White Space Processing Details > 4th par -- which is note under the 3rd par > > "Note that the document parser may have not only normalized any segment breaks, but also collapsed other space characters or > otherwise processed white space according to markup rules. Because CSS processing occurs after the parsing stage, it is not > possible to restore these characters for styling. Therefore, some of the behavior specified below can be affected by these > limitations and may be user agent dependent." > > {COMMENT: this sentence is fine; however I would prefer to see the simple present tense here as the present perfect suggests > to me that you have just talked about what the document processor did, that is the present perfect usually -- but not always > -- needs an antecedent in the past tense. (You are mostly using the present tense in this section.) Fixed. > * * * > IMPORTANT GRAMMAR > 4.1.1 > par 1 1rst bullet 4th item in list > > "Any space immediately following another collapsible space—even one outside the boundary of the inline containing that space, > provided they are both within the same inline formatting context—is collapsed to have zero advance width." > {COMMENT: IMO "they" has no previous referent; > you have the two spaces but you mention them one at a time; > so I would say for extra clarity, "both spaces" > } Done. > * * * > IMPORTANT > 4.1.1 Example 5, esp last paragraph -- > "Note that there will be two spaces between A and B, and none between B and C. This is best avoided by putting spaces outside > the element instead of just inside the opening and closing tags and, where practical, by relying on implicit bidirectionality > instead of explicit embedding levels. " > > {COMMENT: I cannot imagine anyone's leaving spaces just inside the span or rtl or whatever tags, flanking the text inside an > element. But o.k., someone might do this. > But in your discussion you say, leave the spaces outside the element; well the person did have spaces outside the element, but > the trouble was it was collapsed with the spaces inside the element. > So I am a little confused. > Do you mean that the person writing code should not leave spaces inside the element tags that wrap the element text, that > spaces should be placed outside the element tags only? If so you could say "only."} I think the "instead" covers this. Closing no change, if that's alright with you. --- Btw, might I beg you to use an email-quoting mechanism for your spec quotes? I'm happy to receive plaintext email with > or # quote marks or HTML email with appropriate use of <blockquote> or some other formatting convention (such as italics). It's hard for me to pick out your comments with the current formatting: it all flows together, and I must confess to procrastinating on my response because of this visual-parsing frustration... (Fwiw, I typically #-quote spec prose, |-quote proposed text, and >-quote the message I'm replying to. But you don't have to be so specific... as long as I can visually distinguish your comments from the quoted text, it's fine.) Thanks! ~fantasai p.s. Also, please don't tag your messages with [CSSWG]. All of www-style is for CSSWG discussion -- the [CSSWG] tag is just for official CSSWG announcements and minutes. :)
Received on Monday, 21 July 2014 14:08:23 UTC