[CSS21] minor issue: location of comment tokens

btw:

4.1.1 Tokenization
COMMENT tokens do not occur in the grammar (to keep it readable), but any 
number of these tokens may appear anywhere between other tokens.

G.2 Lexical scanner
...
"!"({w}|{comment})*{I}{M}{P}{O}{R}{T}{A}{N}{T}	{return IMPORTANT_SYM;}

yet another exception?

Re: [CSS21] minor issue: location of comment tokens

Andrey Mikhalev wrote:
> 
> 
> btw:
> 
> 4.1.1 Tokenization
> COMMENT tokens do not occur in the grammar (to keep it readable), but 
> any number of these tokens may appear anywhere between other tokens.
> 
> G.2 Lexical scanner
> ...
> "!"({w}|{comment})*{I}{M}{P}{O}{R}{T}{A}{N}{T}    {return IMPORTANT_SYM;}
> 
> yet another exception?

Well, no, IMPORTANT_SYM is a token.

</Daniel>

RE: [css3-values] cap-height unit?

> Would it be useful to add a unit representing the height of capitals
> in the current font?  [snip] It seems like it could be useful when sizing
> images to fit within a line of text, and it further seems like the
> implementation could share a lot of code with the implementation of the 'ex' unit.

My first reaction aligns with Stanimir's suggestion i.e. wouldn't a line-height multiple be more useful
for this use-case ?

Re: [css3-values] cap-height unit?

2008/12/1 Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing <at> microsoft.com>:
>
>> Would it be useful to add a unit representing the height of capitals
>> in the current font?  [snip] It seems like it could be useful when sizing
>> images to fit within a line of text, and it further seems like the
>> implementation could share a lot of code with the implementation of the 'ex' unit.
>
> My first reaction aligns with Stanimir's suggestion i.e. wouldn't a line-height multiple be more useful
for this use-case ?

A lot of times an image is used as a character (e.g., which has no
Unicode, or which is unusual and so absent in most common fonts). A
cap-height unit would be more useful in this case.

--

-- 
cheers,
-ambrose

The 'net used to be run by smart people; now many sites are run by
idiots. So SAD... (Sites that do spam filtering on mails sent to the
abuse contact need to be cut off the net...)

Re: [css3-values] cap-height unit?

Mon, 1 Dec 2008 15:53:44 -0500, /Ambrose Li/:
> 2008/12/1 Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing <at> microsoft.com>:
>
>> My first reaction aligns with Stanimir's suggestion i.e. 
>> wouldn't a line-height multiple be more useful for this 
>> use-case ?
>
> A lot of times an image is used as a character (e.g., which has no 
> Unicode, or which is unusual and so absent in most common fonts). A 
> cap-height unit would be more useful in this case.

Doesn't such an image never need to take the space from the 
text-bottom to the baseline?  In my opinion it is more likely for 
such an image to have the height from the text-bottom to the 
text-top which should be the same as 1em, or I'm missing something?

--

-- 
Stanimir

RE: [css3-values] cap-height unit?

Wow. That piece of code has a thick layer of dust on it. I added that back in 1998...

Consider me in favor of the unit. It was something we used extensively in design models from Pages (the
precursor to Gecko, circa 1991-1995) and designers seemed to like it. IIRC it was used heavily in styled
headlines and initial caps.

Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: www-style-request <at> w3.org [mailto:www-style-request <at> w3.org] On Behalf Of L. David Baron
Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2008 8:21 AM
To: www-style <at> w3.org
Subject: [css3-values] cap-height unit?

Would it be useful to add a unit representing the height of capitals
in the current font?  This would be similar to the 'ex' unit (which
is roughly the height of lowercase letters and corresponds to the
font's x-height metric), but would instead correspond to the
cap-height metric in the font.

It seems like it could be useful when sizing images to fit within a
line of text, and it further seems like the implementation could
share a lot of code with the implementation of the 'ex' unit.

(I thought of this because I just noticed a few stubs of future
plans to implement such a unit in Mozilla.  The implementor there
thought it could be called a 'cap', but I don't have strong opinions
on naming.)

Re: [css3-values] cap-height unit?

2008/12/1 Stanimir Stamenkov <s7an10 <at> netscape.net>:
>
> Mon, 1 Dec 2008 15:53:44 -0500, /Ambrose Li/:
>>
>> 2008/12/1 Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing <at> microsoft.com>:
>>
>>> My first reaction aligns with Stanimir's suggestion i.e. wouldn't a
>>> line-height multiple be more useful for this use-case ?
>>
>> A lot of times an image is used as a character (e.g., which has no
>> Unicode, or which is unusual and so absent in most common fonts). A
>> cap-height unit would be more useful in this case.
>
> Doesn't such an image never need to take the space from the text-bottom to
> the baseline?  In my opinion it is more likely for such an image to have the
> height from the text-bottom to the text-top which should be the same as 1em,
> or I'm missing something?

It may or may not. If an image is to stand for a glyph with no
Unicode, it could be a lowercase letter, in which case it would take
the space between the baseline and the descender line.

(And yes, I did run into this problem myself, though it was before
CSS/Unicode times.)
--

-- 
cheers,
-ambrose

The 'net used to be run by smart people; now many sites are run by

[css21] Initial containing block definition (editorial)

[CSS21] Orphans and Widows

Controlling size of a tab character (U+0009)

Hi,

We found the need to introduce a CSS property that allows controlling the  
size of a tab. This feature will be in some future version of Opera  
(likely after the next version) but I thought it would be good to share  
what we have with the CSS WG and CSS community to see if it's worth  
standardizing. The property is really simple:

   '-o-tab-size'

   Value: <integer> | inherit
   Initial: 8
   Applies to: all elements
   Inherited: yes
   Percentages: N/A
   Media: visual
   Computed value: as specified

Only positive integer values are allowed. The initial value of 8 is taken  
 from section 16.6.1 "The 'white-space' processing model" of the CSS 2.1  
specification.

Kind regards,

--

-- 
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>