- From: Charles Lamont <charles@castle.myzen.co.uk>
- Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2016 10:02:28 +0000
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 2016-11-01 21:13, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Dave Cramer <dauwhe@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Jonathan Kew <jfkthame@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> AFAICS, the current spec does not explicitly address the situation where the
>>> 'sink' value of an initial letter is much greater than its 'size':
>>>
>>> p::first-letter { initial-letter: 1.8 4; }
>>>
>>> Is the following text of the paragraph expected to run _above_ the initial
>>> letter, or should the initial letter's exclusion area be assumed to extend
>>> upwards to the start of the paragraph?
>>
>> I think we should probably extend the exclusion area up. Having the
>> text run above the initial letter further degrades the relationship
>> between the initial letter and the subsequent text—the eye has to do
>> lots of back and forth to read the word, assuming someone would
>> understand the intent in the first place.
>
> Agreed; the exclusion should never start below the line of the
> paragraph, only go above it if necessary.
>
> ~TJ
>
>
https://drafts.csswg.org/css-inline/#drop-initial
Would it be possible to change the fourth case in section 3.1, example
2, such that where the letter size is less than the sink, it aligns at
the top (cap height), please? I think this would better fit the
'simulated letterpress' use case, as well as eliminating the oversail
situation above.
(I think I got this alignment wrong in the first place when arguing the
case that resulted in 'size' being changed from integer to number. Dave
Cramer may remember the discussion).
--
Charles Lamont
Received on Wednesday, 2 November 2016 12:45:36 UTC