Re: [css-writing-modes] Propose writing-mode: sideways-left

Sorry for a slow response, I was on vacation and trying to catch up my

On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 4:42 AM, Bert Bos <> wrote:

> I think I'm starting to like fantasai's proposal.


> (Maybe 'mixed' should be called 'normal' or 'auto', but I'm not sure.)
> I'm not completely clear what the proposal for 'sideways' is. Fantasai's
> proposal cryptically said "sideways (or sideways-rl)". In particular, what
> does setting
>     writing-mode: vertical-lr; text-orientation: sideways
> do?

I'm not sure if I understand what you're asking, but as Jonathan wrote,
sideways and sideways-right are identical; it rotates upright-by-default
characters clock-wise. In other words, it forces all characters set upright
relative to the baseline. Does this solve?

And if that turns characters clockwise, is the value actually still needed?
> between 'text-orientation: mixed' and 'writing-mode: sideways-rl' you cover
> most cases of text turned clockwise. What's missing then is _inline_ CJK
> turned sideways. Is that needed?

Yes, that's the whole purpose of the text-orientation property now. Due to
Unicode unification, there are code points that are either Latin or CJK,
depends on the context or the author's intention. The "mixed" value gives a
default orientation as defined in UTR#50, but UTR#50 acknowledges that it
does not serve all cases and recommend higher level protocols should
provide a way to override the default.

'text-orientation: use-glyph-orientation' isn't mentioned in fantasai's
> proposal, but I assume it is still there (and still at-risk)?

It should follow the resolution in Sydney[1]:

RESOLVED: Drop the values if the SVGWG drops the
              values/properties, otherwise keep them.



Received on Friday, 14 August 2015 05:01:44 UTC