- From: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2015 11:35:32 +0900
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 5:25 AM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote: > On Wednesday 2015-06-03 04:00 +0900, Koji Ishii wrote: >> I'd like to propose: >> >> writing-mode: sideways-left >> >> which is equivalent to setting the two properties: >> writing-mode: vertical-lr; >> text-orientation: sideways-left; > > CSS doesn't have properties where some of their values reset another > property but some don't. So are you proposing that writing-mode > always become a shorthand that includes text-orientation? (And, if > so, is there now a longhand corresponding to the actual value in > writing-mode?) Ah, no. I meant to "move the value to writing-mode", so "text-orientation: sideways-left" is gone in this proposal. Sorry for not clarifying that in the original post. Otherwise we're not solving issues. So I think the correct wording would be: ``` which sets the block flow to left-to-right and the LTR inline flow to bottom-to-top (or RTL inline flow to top-to-bottom.) This produces equivalent rendering by setting the two properties in the current spec: writing-mode: vertical-lr; text-orientation: sideways-left; but with this value defined in this proposal, "text-orientation: sideways-left" is removed instead. ``` I need better wording for the spec, but is the intention clear now? /koji
Received on Wednesday, 3 June 2015 02:36:01 UTC