Re: [css-ui] text-overflow and text-orientation: upright

Florian Rivoal wrote:

> > This will do want you want for this case because the 'vert' feature
> > is always applied to upright vertical textruns. Making this work for
> > fonts lacking support for vertical layout (vertical metrics,
> > vertical substitutions) is out of scope for user agents I think.
>
> Such fonts are in common use in CJK typography, but western authors
> are unlikely to be familiar with them. Vertical typesetting is
> certainly more rare in western text, but it does happen occasionally,
> and when it does authors would likely want the effect Xidorn mentioned.
>
> HTML has both … and ⋮.
>
> Wouldn't it be appropriate for the UA to chose the ellipsis character
> based on the writing mode, and use … (U+2026) in horizontal
> text, and ⋮ (U+22EE) or U+FE19?
>
> If we don't want to mandate this outright, the spec already has a
> provision to allow UAs to pick a different character than … as
> appropriate based on language or script. We could simply allow UAs to
> also consider the writing mode.
>
> This would mean changing this sentence:
>
>   Implementations may substitute a more language/script-appropriate
>   ellipsis character, or three dots "..." if the ellipsis character
>   is unavailable
>
> into this:
>
>   Implementations may substitute a more language, script, or writing-mode
>   appropriate ellipsis character, or three dots "..." if the ellipsis
character
>   is unavailable.

The specific case Xidorn is pointing out has to do with *upright*
vertical Latin text. There isn't a broad use case for text-overflow:
ellipsis in this case. Your change seems fine if you really want to give
implementations a range of options.


​