Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[css-writing-modes][css-pseudo][css-inline] text-combine-upright, initial-letter and i18n quotation #889

Closed
realskk opened this issue Jan 11, 2017 · 3 comments

Comments

@realskk
Copy link

realskk commented Jan 11, 2017

This issue is forked from #653 .

p {
 writing-mode:vertical-rl;
  text-orientation: sideways;
  text-combine-upright: 2;
}
p::first-letter {
  initial-letter: 3;
 }
<p>"13" is a really nice number. Lorem Ipsum...</p>

When TCY includes quotation, and in case of the above code, what is the adequate rendering results?
The below two images are what I imagined.

The example depicts text-orientation: sideways;, but this question is applicable when the contents is vertical writing text, such as Japanese.

Moreover, when quotations are 「」 or 「」, the position of these quotations might be different from "", or ''.

image

image

@svgeesus
Copy link
Contributor

svgeesus commented May 2, 2018

@kojiishi @fantasai is this the same issue as already-closed #653 or does it represent a new request?

@frivoal
Copy link
Collaborator

frivoal commented May 2, 2018

@svgeesus It is forked from that, but distinct. @kojiishi asked for it to be reported separately: #653 (comment)

@fantasai
Copy link
Collaborator

fantasai commented May 7, 2018

The resolutions/response in #653 (comment) apply here as well: there is no special interaction between any of initial-letter, :first-letter, or text-combine-upright, they all apply exactly as specified.

The end result in this case will be that the quotations are sideways, the 13 is upright, and the set as a whole is enlarged to span three lines of text. So, similar to the second rendering, but with larger quotation marks.

Closing as invalid, since there is no spec issue.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants