-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16
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
Application semantics of text emphasis. #1080
Comments
I think we need to tread very carefully when removing this text. In this specific case, the question in my mind is if the inline area is affected by the presence of text emphasis. There are two ways in which I think it is or could be: the content of the inline area changes, and the layout of the inline area can change. LayoutConsider line height, as defined by CSS ; I understand that the semantics of line height in TTML are not identical, but I'd like to set that to one side for the time being. For reference, the CSS Text Decoration Module Level 3 specifies:
and the text in Ruby Layout Module Level 1 says:
Although the marks drawn are only relative to glyph areas, there is still a layout consideration for inline areas that contain text emphasis, so in that sense text emphasis does apply to the inline areas. Inline area contentThe text emphasis does not in fact affect the drawing of any glyph already included in the text content; rather it adds additional glyph marks within the inline areas in which emphasised glyphs exist. From that perspective it changes the content of the inline areas. Proposal: close issue with no changeIn summary, my reasoning for closing this issue with no change is that some aspects of inline areas can be affected by the presence of text emphasis, so it therefore does apply to inline areas. We could go further and further in defining the precise nature of what is impacted, but I don't think it's helpful to do so. If we remove "and inline areas" then that signals that no inline area is affected by the |
You are reading too much into the meaning of applies. First, I am saying that the only reason that the text "or other inline areas" is present now is because I copied the text from the When we don't mention or exclude a specific type of area from the prose description, it does not mean that an implementation can ignore the semantics of the style in all unstated cases. All of the other semantics of layout and its side effects are still in scope. |
@skynavga I've gone back and re-read what glyph area means - I think you're saying that text emphasis is always applied by adding glyphs to glyph areas and never to any other kind of inline area. Can we add a note to the section on text emphasis pointing out that it may affect line height especially in a CSS based presentation system? My reading of |
To clarify previous comment, @skynavga has persuaded me that "glyph area" is actually the only kind of inline area that gets extra content due to text emphasis, so I'm okay with removing the "or other inline areas" text as proposed in the issue. |
Clarify text emphasis application (#1080).
When authored in TTML2 1ed [1], the application (applies) semantics of text emphasis was copied from the definition of text decoration, inadvertently including the text "or other inline areas", which should be removed since text emphasis cannot be applied to inline areas that are not glyph areas. This is an editorial change to remove unintentional language which has no affect on conformance.
[1] https://www.w3.org/TR/2018/REC-ttml2-20181108/#style-attribute-textEmphasis
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: