Skip to content

[css-text-decor] "grapheme cluster" versus "character" inconsistency in definition of text-emphasis #4236

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

Open
emuller-amazon opened this issue Aug 22, 2019 · 3 comments

Comments

@emuller-amazon
Copy link

https://drafts.csswg.org/css-text-decor-3/#text-emphasis-style-property

The value "" for the text-emphasis-style property says:

Display the given string as marks. Authors should not specify more than one character in . The UA may truncate or ignore strings consisting of more than one grapheme cluster.

Shouldn't "grapheme cluster" be replaced by "character" to match the second sentence.

@dbaron dbaron changed the title [css-text-decor] [css-text-decor] "grapheme cluster" versus "character" inconsistency in definition of text-emphasis Aug 22, 2019
@upsuper upsuper closed this as completed Aug 23, 2019
@upsuper upsuper reopened this Aug 23, 2019
@upsuper
Copy link
Member

upsuper commented Aug 23, 2019

I think the first sentence should be changed to use "grapheme cluster" since "character" is a vague concept.

@emuller-amazon
Copy link
Author

Either way works for me.

@fantasai
Copy link
Collaborator

fantasai commented Mar 11, 2022

I actually somewhat intentionally used the word “character” here, because because “character” is a word that's immediately understandable to authors. There are a variety of possible interpretations, but the distinctions are not really relevant here, since most characters that would be appropriate for this usage are single-codepoint grapheme clusters. So if the statement is a bit vague, it doesn't actually matter. But if it's using weird unfamiliar terminology, it's hard to understand.

I was more precise for the UA requirement, because implementers need the precision.

@emuller-amazon Let me know if this works for you, or if you think that we should be making some different call here.

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

5 participants