> [Original Message] > From: Michael Everson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > At 12:22 -0400 2004-05-25, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >On dominoes: I agree that there is no plain-text distinction between > >domino orientations, > > Figure 1 shows a distinction being made. > > >and that it is appropriate to code each domino only once. > > I disagree. > > >... I also agree that a single convention such as > >low-end-leftmost should be chosen so that CSS glyph rotation will > >produce consistent results. > > CSS glyph rotation? I am astonished. We have not done that with > the multitude of arrows we have encoded. Why would you want > to make this into a script with complex rendering, John?
Because the difference in orientation in Figure 1 has no semantic difference. The vertical orientation appears to have been chosen as a way of emphasizing the double bones in Figure 1, but the semantic content of the text remains the same if they were horizontal. Rotating an arrow does cause a semantic difference, even when the arrow is in plain text. Rotating a domino does not cause any difference in meaning when used in plain text. Selecting a standard orientation for a domino is not necessary for plain text, but it does make it easier to do fancy text or non-linear layout.
