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

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

From: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 02:33:52 +0900
Message-ID: <CAN9ydbVLUtQ_T1seBECQpOgiQG65PDCdZ1MeoBv54iFCKxcrmQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Sorry that my voice this time was too small, but it looks like it was
taken as if the implementation complexity was the only reason.

I prefer this from authors perspective too. When you want to rotate
clock-wise, authors do:

  writing-mode: vertical-rl;

and most authors do not bother to set text-orientation at all. I do
like to recommend to set "text-orientation: sideways-right" to avoid
surprises, but most responses I get is that they don't want to.

Now with the current spec, if you want to rotate counter-clock-wise, authors do:

  writing-mode: vertical-lr;
  text-orientation: sideways;

So these two are not symmetric to authors. This looks more consistent
for authors to me:

  writing-mode: sideways-left;

BTW, I'm open for the naming if that's the concern.


On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 12:54 PM, L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org> wrote:
>> I still don't follow.
>> With your proposal:
>>  (1) what values does 'writing-mode' take?
>>  (2) what values does 'text-orientation' take?
> Sorry for very unclear proposal...here's the updated syntax by this proposal:
>   writing-mode: horizontal-tb | vertical-rl | vertical-lr | sideways-left
>   text-orientation: mixed | upright | sideways-right
> /koji
Received on Wednesday, 10 June 2015 17:34:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:54 UTC