Dear Martin, dear all,

I think that’s an interesting question.

Am 06.11.2015 um 09:13 schrieb Martin de la Iglesia:
> last week at the SIG Text & Graphics meeting we discussed, among other
> things, an issue related to the recent addition of @points to <surface>
> (<>): in several
> places, the Guidelines suggest to make use of the CSS box model (e.g.
> "margin-top: 0.5em" in Rendition) or other means of
> horizontal/vertical positioning with CSS (e.g. "text-align: center" in
> the <rendition> example). What happens if such horizontal/vertical
> positioning code occurs within a non-rectangular writing area? Consider
> this example:
> <surface ulx="0" uly="0" lrx="3" lry="3">
>    <zone points="1,1 2,3 3,2">
>       <surface>
>          <zone style="margin-top:0.5; margin-left:0.5">
>             <line>some text here</line>
>          </zone>
>       </surface>
>    </zone>
> </surface>
> What would this code mean? Is the text inside (i.e. "margin-top:0.5;
> margin-left:0.5" is meant to be relative to the physical borders of the
> parent <surface>) or outside (i.e. relative to the grid specified in the
> grandparent <surface>) the triangle?

I think it would make sense to have a look at CSS shapes: One should probably
discourage the use of margin-* and padding-* in combination with
@points, and rather use shape-padding. @points would probably roughly
translate to CSS shape-inside: polygon().

> Another problem is that you'd normally have to specify units in CSS
> (i.e. the code above is not valid CSS), whereas you can't specify the
> unit for @points, @ulx etc. How do I say both the CSS and coordinate
> attributes are meant to use the same unit, say, centimetres? How do I
> say they're not?

I don’t remember the details, but I think SVG has a way of solving that.
They also use unit-less coordinates but allow for CSS as well.

> Neither is it clear to me how the new surface/@points can actually be
> used. The Guidelines say, coordinate attributes in <surface> specify the
> grid, while coordinate attributes in <zone> specify a position within
> such a grid. Can I use surface/@points to specify a position on a grid?
> Does the grid need to be specified in the same <surface>, or in an
> ancestor <surface>?

I see your point, but without any answer.


Dr. Frederik Elwert

Post-doctoral researcher
Project manager SeNeReKo
Center for Religious Studies
Ruhr-University Bochum

Universitätsstr. 90a
D-44780 Bochum

Room 2/206
Tel. +49-(0)234 - 32 23024