W3C mailing list search service

Search among 2,298,714 messages in the W3C mailing list archives:

This is page 1, displaying results 1-20 of 23

Closed: [i18n-activity] Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values

Date
Mon, 19 Feb 2018 13:23:01 +0000
Author
r12a via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>

r12a closed this issue. See https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity/issues/387

Re: [i18n-activity] Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values

Date
Mon, 12 Feb 2018 17:49:32 +0000
Author
r12a via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>

Original comment closed. Propose to close this too. -- GitHub Notification of comment by r12a Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity/issues/387#issuecomment-3650041

Re: [i18n-activity] Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values

Date
Fri, 03 Nov 2017 21:19:40 +0000
Author
fantasai via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>

The current proposal is, as stated in the Response line in the DOC ``` text-emphasis-position: [ over | under ] && [ right | left ]? ``` This means that the side in vertical writing modes can be omit

Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-text-decor] Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values

Date
Thu, 19 Oct 2017 03:47:01 +0000
Author
fantasai via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>

1. The grammar is correct, it says that you can specify either clause in either order but the second one is optional. So you can specify `over left` or just `over`, but not just `left`. This forces e

Re: [i18n-activity] Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values

Date
Thu, 28 Sep 2017 14:04:17 +0000
Author
r12a via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>

It would be helpful, i think, to convert this and similar issues that are email-based to github issues for future tracking and discussion. I think we should ask @fantasai about that. -- GitHub Notifi

Re: [i18n-activity] Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values

Date
Thu, 28 Sep 2017 14:02:38 +0000
Author
r12a via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>

We have some info-requests out that relate to this: 1. [Are emphasis marks used for Korean, and if so, which side?](https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity/issues/476) 2. [Position of ruby, text-emphasi

Re: [i18n-activity] Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values

Date
Thu, 28 Sep 2017 13:57:55 +0000
Author
r12a via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>

I think the assumptions in the thread are correct, but it would be useful to get a summary of the current situation from @fantasai as to the current proposal, so that we can review it (since the thre

Re: [i18n-activity] Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values

Date
Mon, 24 Apr 2017 16:49:47 +0000
Author
r12a via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>

-- GitHub Notification of comment by r12a Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity/issues/387#issuecomment-296739590 using your GitHub account

[i18n-activity] Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values

Date
Mon, 24 Apr 2017 16:49:24 +0000
Author
r12a via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>

r12a has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/i18n-activity: == Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values == https://www.w3.org/Mail/flatten/index?subject=Propos

[csswg-drafts] [css-text-decor] Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values

Date
Tue, 11 Apr 2017 18:52:19 +0000
Author
r12a via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>

r12a has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts: == [css-text-decor] Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values == 3.4. Emphasis Mark Position: the tex

Re: [css-text-decor] Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values

Date
Tue, 7 Feb 2017 16:46:58 -0500
Author
fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>

“over”, “horizontal writing mode”, and “vertical writing mode” are technical terms defined in Writing Modes. You would draw the marks to the right, which is “over” for 'upright' text:

Re: [css-text-decor] Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values

Date
Tue, 07 Feb 2017 16:13:49 -0500
Author
Gérard Talbot <www-style@gtalbot.org>

Le 2017-02-07 14:51, fantasai a écrit : Elika, Maybe this reply is not perfectly on topic... but anyways... While developing a test [1] on text-shadow, I stumbled on the difficulty of figuring out

Re: [css-text-decor] Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values

Date
Tue, 7 Feb 2017 14:51:39 -0500
Author
fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>

Someone being like, "I want to make a page that looks like X and it's not possible with CSS today", where X is a realistic thing someone would want to do rather than a mere thought experiment. It doe

Re: [css-text-decor] Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values

Date
Fri, 3 Feb 2017 16:10:30 -0800
Author
Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <pal@sandflow.com>

Hi fantasai, I have filed https://github.com/w3c/ttml2/issues/240 Can you provide (privately if you prefer) what the WG considers a "use-case-backed request"? Thanks, -- Pierre On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at

Re: [css-text-decor] Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values

Date
Fri, 3 Feb 2017 19:03:47 -0500
Author
fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>

The key thing to realize is that the "before" side and the "over" side do not coincide in Mongolian writing. See https://www.w3.org/TR/css-writing-modes-3/#text-flow If there's a demand for it on the

Re: [css-text-decor] Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values

Date
Fri, 3 Feb 2017 07:58:38 -0800
Author
Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <pal@sandflow.com>

Hi fantasai, Thanks for the feedback! Ok. I can file an issue against TTML2. Any additional detail on "handles Mongolian better"? [ed.: I am not a Mongolian expert] Unless the document to which CSS i

Re: [css-text-decor] Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values

Date
Thu, 2 Feb 2017 18:55:49 -0500
Author
fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>

'over' and 'under' also take into account the 'writing-mode', except they do so in a way that handles Mongolian better. The case of "only two lines" isn't really a significant consideration in CSS-ba

Re: [css-text-decor] Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values

Date
Thu, 2 Feb 2017 11:10:15 -0800
Author
Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <pal@sandflow.com>

Hi fantasai et al., I see the following issues: - the problem statement below indicates "[over/under/left/right] is redundant and painful for authors". Doesn't 'before' and 'after' solve this issue s

Re: [css-text-decor] Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values

Date
Thu, 2 Feb 2017 13:25:55 -0500
Author
fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>

I think you should file that issue against TTML2. Its earliest working draft is two years later than the Candidate Recommendation of CSS Text Decoration Level 3. https://www.w3.org/TR/2013/CR-css-tex

Re: [css-text-decor] Proposal for the 'text-emphasis-position' property syntax values

Date
Thu, 2 Feb 2017 10:01:43 -0800
Author
Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <pal@sandflow.com>

Hi all, Have you considered the proposed emphasis positions specified in TTML2 WD? https://www.w3.org/TR/ttml2/#style-value-emphasis-position 'before' and 'after' are used instead of combinations of

Help and hints for using this service

W3C Member? Check the Member-only interface. W3C staff? Use the Team-only interface.