- From: Jonathan Kew <jfkthame@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2014 17:55:35 +0000
- To: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>, bobbytung@wanderer.tw, dholbert@mozilla.com
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On 14/12/14 15:29, Koji Ishii wrote: > On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Jonathan Kew <jfkthame@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 10/12/14 22:36, Daniel Holbert wrote: >> >>> (3) Which 'writing-mode' value should we actually use? There are two >>> distinct vertical values for the "writing-mode" property: "vertical-rl" >>> and "vertical-lr" -- which of those should we use here? (In practice, >>> maybe it doesn't matter, because elsewhere the spec says "There are no >>> line breaking opportunities within inter-character annotations", and I >>> think the "rl" vs. "lr" distinction would only matter if there are >>> linebreaks. ... >> >> IIRC, the distinction is significant even without linebreaks if the >> 'text-orientation' property is 'sideways': in this case, glyphs are rotated >> 90° CW in 'vertical-rl' mode, but 90° CCW in 'vertical-lr'. > > 'sideways' always rotates CW regardless of 'vertical-rl' or > 'vertical-lr', because 'over' direction of baseline is on the right > side, so it doesn't matter either. I can't imagine any cases where it > matters. That's not what Writing Modes[1] says: # sideways # # This value is equivalent to sideways-right in vertical-rl writing # mode and equivalent to sideways-left in vertical-lr writing mode. Given that: # sideways-left # # In vertical writing modes, this causes text to be set as if in a # horizontal layout, but rotated 90° counter-clockwise. this means that "writing-mode:vertical-lr; text-orientation:sideways" results in text that is rotated counter-clockwise. And then the 'over' direction of sideways-left text (and therefore of 'text-orientation:sideways' text in 'writing-mode:vertical-lr') is on the left.[2] JK [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-writing-modes/#text-orientation [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-writing-modes/#logical-to-physical
Received on Sunday, 14 December 2014 17:56:03 UTC