- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 18:44:57 -0400
- To: 馬場孝夫 <baba@bpsinc.jp>, Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
- Cc: Jonathan Kew <jfkthame@gmail.com>, Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>, Gérard Talbot <www-style@gtalbot.org>, W3C www-style mailing list <www-style@w3.org>
On 09/19/2015 08:17 PM, 馬場孝夫 wrote: > Sorry for late response, and thank you for clear explanation. > >> I am not strongly opposed either way. However, I think than >> symmetry between sideways-left and sideways-right is overstated. >> sideways right just affects glyph orientation, while sideways-left >> also affects the baseline orientation and line progression direction. >> >> So I have a preference for something like sideways and sideways-reverse >> over -left and -right. > > I've understood Florian's point, your opinion makes sense. > > >> Option A: it prints "sideways" and "sideways-right" >> Option B: it prints "sideways" and "sideways" >> Option C: it prints "sideways-right" and "sideways-right" > > So now I think both B and C are fine if there is no compatibility problems. To close on this, the CSSWG resolved on B. This has now been edited into the ED. ~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 30 September 2015 23:30:59 UTC