[CSSWG][css-writing-modes] Last Call for Comments on CSS3 Writing Modes

[CE Whitehead]

Hi. A few more proofreading nits on http://www.w3.org/TR/css-writing-modes-3/

From: CE Whitehead <***@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2013 16:08:07 -0500

. . .
From: fantasai <fantasai.lists_at_inkedblade.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 21:07:20 -0800

The CSS WG has published a Last Call Working Draft of CSS Writing Modes
http://www.w3.org/TR/css-writing-modes-3/
. . .
. . .

I have a proofreading comment on the text in Example 1 in Section 2.2
(http://www.w3.org/TR/css-writing-modes-3/#unicode-bidi).
"For example, where <BR/> is a forced paragraph break the bidi ordering is identical
between
<para>...<i1><i2>...<BR/>...</i2><i1>...</para>
and
. . .
"<para>...<i1><i2>...</i2><i1><BR/><i1><i2>...</i2><i1>...</para>
for all values of unicode-bidi on inline elements <i1> and <i2>"
Should not this text read the following --
=>
"For example, where <BR/> is a forced paragraph break the bidi ordering is identical
between
<para>...<i1><i2>...<BR/>...</i2></i1>...</para>
and
<para>...<i1><i2>...</i2></i1><BR/><i1><i2>...</i2></i1>...</para>
for all values of unicode-bidi on inline elements <i1> and <i2>"
?
{COMMENT: I am confused by this example as I would normally expect the <i1> element to
close before the <para> element. I am sure you meant to do so here.}
. . .

Here are my additional comments:
* * *

4.3

"alphabetic
The alphabetic baseline is assumed to be at the under margin edge.
"central
The central baseline is assumed to be halfway between the under and over margin edges of the box. "
=>
"alphabetic
The alphabetic baseline is assumed to be at the under-margin edge.
"central
The central baseline is assumed to be halfway between the under- and over-margin edges of the box. "

{COMMENT: normally when you use two words to modify a single word, as when "under margin", "over margin" modify the word, "edge" or "edges", then it is customary to join the two modifying words with a hyphen.}

* * *
6.2
inline-start

"Nominally the side from which text of its inline base direction will start. For boxes with a used direction value of ltr, this means the line-left side. For boxes with a used direction value of rtl, this means the line-right side. "
=>
"The side of a box from which text will
start. For boxes with a used direction value of ltr, this means the
line-left side. For boxes with a used direction value of rtl, this means
the line-right side. "
?
{COMMENT: This text is unclear to me; not sure what you mean by "its" -- the box's?; I am not sure thus how to reword "inline base direction" -- so I left this phrase out though you probably need something. Also do you need to say "Nominally"? Because "nominally" does not mean anything to me in this sentence, though normally "nominally" is defined as "in name" -- but I cannot see saying this here; it just seems to not be the right word. Also finally, and I know this is a dumb question, but why can the inline--start never be at the top or the bottom, when the lines run top-to-bottom or bottom-to-top? The diagram seems to suggest that inline-start can be at the bottom or top.}
* * *
6.2 second paragraph (after the list of four "flow-relative directions" -- block-end, block-start, etc.)
"Where unambiguous (or dual-meaning), the terms start and end are used in place of block-start/inline-start and block-end/inline-end, respectively."

{COMMENT: "unambiguous" is the opposite of "dual-meaning" -- "dual meaning" means "ambiguous"; do you mean the following? (if so it's o.k. to eliminate the stuff in parentheses altogether):}

=>
"Where unambiguous (that is, where not dual-meaning), the terms start and end are used in place of block-start/inline-start and block-end/inline-end, respectively."

BETTER STILL IS =>
"Where unambiguous, the terms start
and end are used in place of block-start/inline-start and
block-end/inline-end, respectively."
* * *

6.3 Line-relative directions

Figure 15, Figure 16
{COMMENT: is it possible to have more space between these two figures?}

* * *

If I have any more comments before the 24th, I will send them.


Best,

--C. E. Whitehead
***@hotmail.com

[Koji Ishii]

On Dec 21, 2013, at 20:39, CE Whitehead <***@hotmail.com<mailto:***@hotmail.com>> wrote:

4.3
"alphabetic
The alphabetic baseline is assumed to be at the under margin edge.
"central
The central baseline is assumed to be halfway between the under and over margin edges of the box. "
=>
"alphabetic
The alphabetic baseline is assumed to be at the under-margin edge.
"central
The central baseline is assumed to be halfway between the under- and over-margin edges of the box. "

{COMMENT: normally when you use two words to modify a single word, as when "under margin", "over margin" modify the word, "edge" or "edges", then it is customary to join the two modifying words with a hyphen.}

Fixed.

6.2
inline-start

"Nominally the side from which text of its inline base direction will start. For boxes with a used direction value of ltr, this means the line-left side. For boxes with a used direction value of rtl, this means the line-right side. "
=>
"The side of a box from which text will start. For boxes with a used direction value of ltr, this means the line-left side. For boxes with a used direction value of rtl, this means the line-right side. "
?
{COMMENT: This text is unclear to me; not sure what you mean by "its" -- the box's?; I am not sure thus how to reword "inline base direction" -- so I left this phrase out though you probably need something. Also do you need to say "Nominally"? Because "nominally" does not mean anything to me in this sentence, though normally "nominally" is defined as "in name" -- but I cannot see saying this here; it just seems to not be the right word. Also finally, and I know this is a dumb question, but why can the inline--start never be at the top or the bottom, when the lines run top-to-bottom or bottom-to-top? The diagram seems to suggest that inline-start can be at the bottom or top.}

Please allow me to work on this later.

6.2 second paragraph (after the list of four "flow-relative directions" -- block-end, block-start, etc.)
"Where unambiguous (or dual-meaning), the terms start and end are used in place of block-start/inline-start and block-end/inline-end, respectively."

{COMMENT: "unambiguous" is the opposite of "dual-meaning" -- "dual meaning" means "ambiguous"; do you mean the following? (if so it's o.k. to eliminate the stuff in parentheses altogether):}

Fixed.

6.3 Line-relative directions

Figure 15, Figure 16
{COMMENT: is it possible to have more space between these two figures?}

Fixed.

/koji

[Koji Ishii]

On Jan 27, 2014, at 17:34, Koji Ishii <***@gluesoft.co.jp<mailto:***@gluesoft.co.jp>> wrote:

On Dec 21, 2013, at 20:39, CE Whitehead <***@hotmail.com<mailto:***@hotmail.com>> wrote:
6.2
inline-start

"Nominally the side from which text of its inline base direction will start. For boxes with a used direction value of ltr, this means the line-left side. For boxes with a used direction value of rtl, this means the line-right side. "
=>
"The side of a box from which text will start. For boxes with a used direction value of ltr, this means the line-left side. For boxes with a used direction value of rtl, this means the line-right side. "
?
{COMMENT: This text is unclear to me; not sure what you mean by "its" -- the box's?; I am not sure thus how to reword "inline base direction" -- so I left this phrase out though you probably need something. Also do you need to say "Nominally"? Because "nominally" does not mean anything to me in this sentence, though normally "nominally" is defined as "in name" -- but I cannot see saying this here; it just seems to not be the right word. Also finally, and I know this is a dumb question, but why can the inline--start never be at the top or the bottom, when the lines run top-to-bottom or bottom-to-top? The diagram seems to suggest that inline-start can be at the bottom or top.}

Please allow me to work on this later.

Fixed.

/koji

[fantasai]

Post by Koji Ishii

Post by CE Whitehead
4.3
"alphabetic
The alphabetic baseline is assumed to be at the under margin edge.
"central
The central baseline is assumed to be halfway between the under and over margin edges of the box. "
=>
"alphabetic
The alphabetic baseline is assumed to be at the under-margin edge.
"central
The central baseline is assumed to be halfway between the under- and over-margin edges of the box. "
{COMMENT: normally when you use two words to modify a single word, as when "under margin", "over margin" modify the word,
"edge" or "edges", then it is customary to join the two modifying words with a hyphen.}

Fixed.

Actually, this is an incorrect edit. I've reverted it. Under and
over are in this case used as adjectives, and are not part of
the word "margin". This follows the pattern of "left margin" as
opposed to "left-margin".

Post by Koji Ishii

Post by CE Whitehead
6.2 second paragraph (after the list of four "flow-relative directions" -- block-end, block-start, etc.)
"Where unambiguous (or dual-meaning), the terms start and end are used in place of block-start/inline-start and
block-end/inline-end, respectively."
{COMMENT: "unambiguous" is the opposite of "dual-meaning" -- "dual meaning" means "ambiguous"; do you mean the following?
(if so it's o.k. to eliminate the stuff in parentheses altogether):}

Fixed.

Similarly, this is an incorrect edit. The intent is the opposite
of "ambiguous" in the sense of "lacking clearness or definiteness".
If the intent is clear from context OR if the intent encompasses
both meanings, then the ambiguous terms start/end are allowed to
be used. I have removed the parentheses to make this clear.

~fantasai

[Koji Ishii]

Post by fantasai

Post by Koji Ishii

Post by CE Whitehead
6.2 second paragraph (after the list of four "flow-relative directions" -- block-end, block-start, etc.)
"Where unambiguous (or dual-meaning), the terms start and end are used in place of block-start/inline-start and
block-end/inline-end, respectively."
{COMMENT: "unambiguous" is the opposite of "dual-meaning" -- "dual meaning" means "ambiguous"; do you mean the following?
(if so it's o.k. to eliminate the stuff in parentheses altogether):}

Fixed.

Similarly, this is an incorrect edit. The intent is the opposite
of "ambiguous" in the sense of "lacking clearness or definiteness".
If the intent is clear from context OR if the intent encompasses
both meanings, then the ambiguous terms start/end are allowed to
be used. I have removed the parentheses to make this clear.

After a bit more discussion with fantasai, the intent of “dual-meaning” in this context is “both directions”, but I thought it means “either. direction”

Maybe it’s better to use different wording that indicates “both directions” better?

/koji

[Koji Ishii]

After a bit more discussion with fantasai, the intent of "dual-meaning" in this context
is "both directions", but I thought it means "either. direction"
Maybe it's better to use different wording that indicates "both directions" better?

And we've fixed this.

/koji