- From: Gérard Talbot <www-style@gtalbot.org>
- Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 14:13:21 -0400
- To: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
- Cc: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>, Elika Etemad <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, W3C www-style mailing list <www-style@w3.org>, Masataka Yakura <masataka.yakura@gmail.com>
Le 2015-06-22 14:03, Florian Rivoal a écrit : >> On 22 Jun 2015, at 11:35, Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp> wrote: >> >>> There seems to be no implicit (and no explicit) range limit to the >>> number of consecutive characters when using 'text-combine-upright: >>> all' but there is a range 2-4 limit with 'text-combine-upright: >>> digits n': >>> Q1: is that assumption correct? (To me, this seems odd and >>> incoherent.) >> >> Correct. >> >>> Q2: If there is no range limitation with 'text-combine-upright: all', >>> then >>> why should there be one with 'text-combine-upright: digits n' where >>> 'n' >>> would be a [2-9] digit? >> >> “all” is not likely to be affected much by the number of characters; >> it just measure the whole string, and shrink if needed. >> >> “digits” checks the number of characters, and thus could fail on >> specific number. A request was made to avoid implementations and >> testing that were never used in the real world. > > I agree with Gérard. > > I understand wanting to limit to 4 digits since there is no use case > for more if that makes implementations simpler. > > I do not understand why the logic is not applied to the all value, > allowing it to only match up to 4 digits. Yes. Exactly what I thought. Thank you Florian. Gérard
Received on Monday, 22 June 2015 18:13:53 UTC