- From: Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <pal@sandflow.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2017 08:05:46 -0700
- To: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
- Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk>
Hi Simon et al., Is the intent for CSS stroke-width [1] to have the same behavior as -webkit-text-stroke-width [2]? If so, it looks like stroke is not drawn outside the glyph outline, but on the glyph outline, thereby hiding the fill of the glyph. See code pen at: https://codepen.io/palemieux/pen/ZJpwxJ This does not match subtitle/caption practice where the outline is drawn outside and used to create a contrast between the fill of the glyph and the background. Can the stroke be drawn outside the outline? Best, -- Pierre [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/fill-stroke-3/ [2] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/-webkit-text-stroke-color On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 9:19 AM, Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk> wrote: > Thanks for that Simon! I've updated the page with a "partial mapping" on the > basis that while the outline thickness maps to stroke-width quite well, and > there's good support for this in browsers (despite the spec being in FPWD), > the blur radius length component in TTML has no equivalent. It's possible > that some combination of text-shadow and stroke-width might achieve a > similar visual effect. > > Kind regards, > > Nigel > > > From: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com> > Date: Friday, 28 July 2017 at 19:35 > To: Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk> > Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org> > Subject: Re: Timed Text / CSS styling requirements > > On Jul 22, 2017, at 2:25 AM, Nigel Megitt <nigel.megitt@bbc.co.uk> wrote: > > Dear CSS WG, > > Following up from the request for horizontal review of TTML2 and also on an > observation that mapping even some TTML1 styling permitted in the IMSC1 text > profile is not straightforward, TTWG has created a wiki page [1] listing all > the styling features in TTML2 and IMSC with their mapping to CSS where > available, for review, with each classified as unsupported/partial > mapping/direct mapping as appropriate. > > Disclaimer: there may be some errors in understanding in which case the > mappings might be inappropriately classified. Review comments/fixes welcome. > > It's probably worth noting that the most important high level objective is > for the styling requirements for subtitles and captions are supported in > CSS. > > In terms of specific issues TTWG is probably less concerned about syntactic > differences than semantic ones, since any CSS based TTML implementation > would need to map syntax in any case. > > Thanks also to @dbaron for his email that began this assessment for us back > in November. > > This alignment requirement is also being looked at by TAG at > https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/138 > > > One update to this page: > > textOutline maps to the CSS fill and stroke properties > (https://www.w3.org/TR/fill-stroke-3/) so should be labeled as "Unclear > mapping", I think. > > Simon > >
Received on Thursday, 3 August 2017 15:06:38 UTC