W3C mailing list search service
Search among 2,304,220 messages in the W3C mailing list archives:
Closed: [i18n-activity] Doesn't example 3 in text-underline-position break current UA behavior?
- Date
- Mon, 19 Feb 2018 13:22:41 +0000
- Author
- r12a via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
r12a closed this issue. See https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity/issues/388
Re: [i18n-activity] Doesn't example 3 in text-underline-position break current UA behavior?
- Date
- Mon, 12 Feb 2018 18:30:04 +0000
- Author
- r12a via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Discussed during i18n telecon. Agreed to close. -- GitHub Notification of comment by r12a Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity/issues/388#issuecomment-365016753 u
Re: [i18n-activity] Doesn't example 3 in text-underline-position break current UA behavior?
- Date
- Sat, 03 Feb 2018 01:17:11 +0000
- Author
- fantasai via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
The request to i18n is to evaluate the decision of defaulting to `auto` rather than `under` - for CJKM in general, via UA style rules - for declarations which specify a position for vertical writing
Re: [i18n-activity] Doesn't example 3 in text-underline-position break current UA behavior?
- Date
- Mon, 25 Sep 2017 17:10:41 +0000
- Author
- r12a via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Current status: This is quite complicated to piece together. It would be nice to have a summary of the final proposal, after agreement with the various parties in the discussion before we pass judgem
Re: [i18n-activity] Doesn't example 3 in text-underline-position break current UA behavior?
- Date
- Mon, 24 Apr 2017 16:53:14 +0000
- Author
- r12a via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
CSS doc says: Open: Accepted =i18n= Evaluate whether defaulting omitted auto/under to auto is better than under. https://drafts.csswg.org/css-text-decor-3/issues-cr-2013#issue-18 -- GitHub Notificati
[i18n-activity] Doesn't example 3 in text-underline-position break current UA behavior?
- Date
- Mon, 24 Apr 2017 16:52:38 +0000
- Author
- r12a via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
r12a has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity: == Doesn't example 3 in text-underline-position break current UA behavior? == https://www.w3.org/Mail/flatten/index?subject
Re: [css-text-decor] Doesn't example 3 in text-underline-position break current UA behavior?
- List
- www-style
- Date
- Fri, 23 Dec 2016 00:17:58 +0330
- Author
- fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Actually, this is very easy to express. [lang]:not([lang|=zh],[lang|=ja]) { text-underline-position: auto; } and you are right that we should include such a rule to overturn the CJK rules in nested n
Re: [css-text-decor] Doesn't example 3 in text-underline-position break current UA behavior?
- List
- www-style
- Date
- Thu, 22 Dec 2016 17:57:55 +0330
- Author
- fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
The problem with this is that we no longer have an option that indicates a preference for alphabetic underlining in vertical text. When it's specified through the UA style sheet, the author still ret
Re: [css-text-decor] Doesn't example 3 in text-underline-position break current UA behavior?
- List
- www-style
- Date
- Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:28:24 +0900
- Author
- Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>
Revisiting this thread after 6 months since last reply gave me a slightly fresh view. I still agree on this. For this to work, we need two edits to the spec: 1. Remove the UA stylesheet rules and let
Re: [css-text-decor] Doesn't example 3 in text-underline-position break current UA behavior?
- List
- www-style
- Date
- Wed, 8 Jul 2015 10:59:34 +0900
- Author
- Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>
fantasai, can you give us the idea how you want to change the syntax further? <p dir="ltr">fantasai, can you give us the idea how you want to change the syntax further?</p> <p dir="ltr">/koji </p> <d
Re: [css-text-decor] Doesn't example 3 in text-underline-position break current UA behavior?
- List
- www-style
- Date
- Fri, 3 Jul 2015 15:28:46 +0900
- Author
- Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>
Thank you for the clarification. I agree with you, but the spec was written under the different assumption, that is why I asked clarification. In the WG conf call (minutes here[1]), we discussed your
Re: [css-text-decor] Doesn't example 3 in text-underline-position break current UA behavior?
- List
- www-style
- Date
- Thu, 02 Jul 2015 10:12:40 -0700
- Author
- "Myles C. Maxfield" <mmaxfield@apple.com>
Reply inline. I'm proposing that "auto" should take any and all context into consideration, including things like which language the text seems to have come from, how many characters in a row seem to
Re: [css-text-decor] Doesn't example 3 in text-underline-position break current UA behavior?
- List
- www-style
- Date
- Wed, 1 Jul 2015 14:39:29 +0900
- Author
- Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>
Also there's a text saying "If left or right is specified alone, under is Clarification appreciated since your arguments could read in two ways; I understand you want "auto" to do proper positioning
Re: [css-text-decor] Doesn't example 3 in text-underline-position break current UA behavior?
- List
- www-style
- Date
- Mon, 29 Jun 2015 11:58:09 -0700
- Author
- "Myles C. Maxfield" <mmaxfield@apple.com>
Replies inline. The cases I'm trying to guard against are things like: "left right" "auto under" "left left right left" Yes, please see my argument regarding how this language-specific logic should b
Re: [css-text-decor] Doesn't example 3 in text-underline-position break current UA behavior?
- List
- www-style
- Date
- Mon, 29 Jun 2015 01:09:24 +0900
- Author
- Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>
Hi Myles, A double bar in CSS syntax is "one or more of them must occur, in any order"[1], so I think Masayuki's syntax "[auto|under] || [left|right]" should give you what you proposed. Also there's
Re: [css-text-decor] Doesn't example 3 in text-underline-position break current UA behavior?
- List
- www-style
- Date
- Wed, 17 Jun 2015 10:41:16 -0700
- Author
- "Myles C. Maxfield" <mmaxfield@apple.com>
Hello, Using the “under” value in horizontal CJK text is not incorrect. In particular, many CJK glyphs (correctly) lie below the alphabetic baseline, which means that an underline which lies on t
Re: [css-text-decor] Doesn't example 3 in text-underline-position break current UA behavior?
- List
- www-style
- Date
- Mon, 15 Jun 2015 10:41:11 -0400
- Author
- fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Hi Masayuki, I think you are correct, and I will raise this to the WG. I expect we will update the spec as you suggest. ~fantasai
[css-text-decor] Doesn't example 3 in text-underline-position break current UA behavior?
- List
- www-style
- Date
- Mon, 11 May 2015 17:50:47 +0900
- Author
- Masayuki Nakano <masayuki@d-toybox.com>
In EXAMPLE3 of text-underline-position <http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-text-decor-3/#example-affafc32>, it suggests UA should use following style in its default UA style sheet: text-underline-position:
Help and hints for using this service
W3C Member? Check the Member-only interface. W3C staff? Use the Team-only interface.