W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2015

Re: [css-writing-modes] the caption-side keywords

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 11:27:04 +0200
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDCAXM+zi8VmagDXgQw8dtZCqYGihnLzP=w6DESF2+QErw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>
Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 9:31 AM, Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 4:15 PM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
> wrote:
>>
>> On 08/26/2015 08:03 AM, Koji Ishii wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 8:55 AM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net
>>> <mailto:fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>> wrote:
>>>
>>>         [snip]
>>>         However, the spec says 'bottom' must be treated as 'block-start'.
>>>         This may cause problem.
>>>         It would be better 'bottom' treated as block-end?
>>>
>>>
>>>     This was done intentionally as error-handling, as Tab explains:
>>>     https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2015Aug/0072.html
>>>     See also below...
>>>
>>>     I don't think this is good to change.
>>>
>>>
>>> What about leaving it undefined? While I understand what you and Tab
>>> want, with the current definition, "bottom" is "block-end
>>> if horizontal, or block-start if vertical" if we look from the logical
>>> implementation. Having such a special code path doesn't
>>> seem to worth the goal.
>>>
>>> Just checked IE, Blink, and WebKit, IE and Blink/WebKit already disagree.
>>> Gecko should also disagree given its side caption
>>> support. I think "undefined" is the appropriate definition in such case.
>>>
>>> Not interoperable among all major browsers should be good enough to
>>> prevent authors from using it, so I think your goal is
>>> still secured.
>>
>>
>> I don't think it makes sense to have undefined behavior for
>> something so simple. Either you support side-captions, and
>> you handle it that way, or you don't, and you treat it as
>> block-start. It's not hard.
>
>
> "Not hard" can't justify additional code that doesn't seem to help authors
> nor users.

What additional code do you think there is?  The switch is at the UA
level, not a page level or something like that - if the UA doesn't
support side captions, its code says "top/bottom means block-start in
vertical wm".  Otherwise, its code says "top/bottom means top/bottom
in vertical wm".  You don't distinguish the cases inside of a single
UA, you just write your code to do one or the other.

~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 26 August 2015 09:27:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 26 August 2015 09:27:53 UTC