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

Fix typos. #970

Closed
skynavga opened this issue Aug 3, 2018 · 6 comments
Closed

Fix typos. #970

skynavga opened this issue Aug 3, 2018 · 6 comments

Comments

@skynavga
Copy link
Collaborator

skynavga commented Aug 3, 2018

  1. change "an data" to "a data" in [data binding context], [data defining context], and 9.3.2.
  2. change "the directly" to "that directly" in [simple data embedding].
  3. change "combine value" to "combined value" in 7th bullet of 2nd note in 6.1.1.
  4. reference to term "sourced data embedding" in 9.1.3 is linked to terms-simple-data-embedding.
  5. fix the link targets of the two internal links to tts:border in E.1.35
@skynavga skynavga added this to the PR milestone Aug 3, 2018
@skynavga skynavga self-assigned this Aug 3, 2018
@nigelmegitt
Copy link
Contributor

  1. change tts:writingMode="tblr" to tts:writingMode="rltb" in 10.2.45 example.

What's the motivation for this? The example has a single line of top to bottom text, so the change seems like it would make no difference to the example.

@skynavga
Copy link
Collaborator Author

skynavga commented Aug 7, 2018

@nigelmegitt sorry, I meant it should read tbrl; I will edit above comment; p.s. it needs to have block progression direction of right to left in order to have the A glyph rotate clockwise; if block progression direction is left to right, then A will rotate counter-clockwise

@nigelmegitt
Copy link
Contributor

@skynavga ok but still, what difference would it make?

@spoeschel
Copy link

  1. fix the link targets of the two internal links to tts:border in E.1.35

@nigelmegitt
Copy link
Contributor

@skynavga re #970 (comment) now that we're making rotation be clockwise or not at all, presumably this change (5) is no longer needed?

@skynavga
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@nigelmegitt re: #970 (comment) you are correct

skynavga added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 12, 2018
skynavga added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 12, 2018
@skynavga skynavga removed the pr open label Sep 12, 2018
@skynavga skynavga removed their assignment Nov 5, 2018
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

3 participants