RE: [CSS22] 10.8 "tall enough"

>From: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com
<francois.remy.dev@outlook.com?Subject=RE%3A%20%5BCSS22%5D%2010.8%20%22tall%20enough%22&In-Reply-To=%3CAM0PR0402MB3875045BB4A3A8DA45EB5596A5780%40AM0PR0402MB3875.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com%3E&References=%3CAM0PR0402MB3875045BB4A3A8DA45EB5596A5780%40AM0PR0402MB3875.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com%3E>
>
>Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 00:37:27 +0000
>To: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com
<glenn@skynav.com?Subject=RE%3A%20%5BCSS22%5D%2010.8%20%22tall%20enough%22&In-Reply-To=%3CAM0PR0402MB3875045BB4A3A8DA45EB5596A5780%40AM0PR0402MB3875.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com%3E&References=%3CAM0PR0402MB3875045BB4A3A8DA45EB5596A5780%40AM0PR0402MB3875.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com%3E>>,
W3C Style <www-style@w3.org
<www-style@w3.org?Subject=RE%3A%20%5BCSS22%5D%2010.8%20%22tall%20enough%22&In-Reply-To=%3CAM0PR0402MB3875045BB4A3A8DA45EB5596A5780%40AM0PR0402MB3875.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com%3E&References=%3CAM0PR0402MB3875045BB4A3A8DA45EB5596A5780%40AM0PR0402MB3875.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com%3E>
>
>
>I think it’s not a a term requiring a definition, as it seems more like a
mathematical property to me ("for any content, there exists a length
starting from which more than one solution exists to the alignment
constraints stated above”).

A mathematical property has no meaning without a definition. In this
context, the term "tall" is not defined: does it mean ascender plus
descender for a specific glyph, ascender plus descender of the font and
font size used for a specific glyph? Does it include half leading, etc?
Also, "enough" is not defined: enough to meet what constraint(s)? Also,
what is the scope of "such boxes"? Are they all inline-boxes or just those
with top/bottom vertical alignment?

As a reader, the current text is vague and could be improved.