- From: Amelia Bellamy-Royds <amelia.bellamy.royds@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 21:01:42 -0700
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>, Behdad Esfahbod <behdad@behdad.org>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAFDDJ7ysE8pHmDrjXN9REj4WYM8JigCa0gRT7JEv=8NhABonwg@mail.gmail.com>
Will there be a more complete description somewhere in the spec about how forced word breaks should be applied to scripts and fonts with complex text shaping? I would like to be able to link to such rules for SVG. SVG manually-positioned text (where individual characters are given explicit coordinates) and text on a path can introduce forced breaks. The language in SVG 1.1 with regard to these layout patterns only focused on ligatures (disallowing them, since you can't position two halves of a ligature separately), not on context-sensitive letter forms (which should still be used, but it wasn't explicitly specified). Implementations are very inconsistent about how they render text in these cases (Firefox is the only browser that currently supports legible Arabic text on a path). And SVG 2's requirement to support decorative OpenType features such as contextual alternatives will be less effective if the "context" is lost when using SVG text layout. I have promised to help improve the spec for SVG 2, but referencing standard CSS behavior would be even better. ~Amelia On 9 March 2016 at 20:01, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: > On 03/08/2016 10:06 PM, Koji Ishii wrote: > >> >> When break-all a word of 10 chars at 3: >> 1. Shape the 3 with the rest as text-after. >> 2. Shape the 3 without text-after. >> 3. Shape the 10, find glyphs that map to the 3 chars and use them. >> >> I think you're talking about the diff between 1 and 2, correct? Is 3 >> still differ from 1? >> >> If 1 and 3 are the same, it helps our efficiency a bit. >> > > I think for the purpose of CSS, either #1 or #3 is acceptable. > For Arabic specifically (unsure of other scripts), analyzing > the string and applying zwj or zwnj to the string as appropriate > is also acceptable. > > #2 is unacceptable. > > ~fantasai > >
Received on Thursday, 10 March 2016 04:02:10 UTC