Closed xfq closed 2 years ago
I always thought the organisation of clreq is a little odd wrt section 3.1. The typography index tends to view the world through the optic of what operations are being performed on the text - eg. it groups together stuff related to the process of line breaking - whereas clreq in section 3.1 groups stuff together around the topic of punctuation.
Personally, i'd prefer to break out the general information about what punctuation is used and what for, and move it under section 2, then reassign the other subsections under headings related to both line breaking and text-alignment, but i doubt that will happen.
In the meantime, it seems to me that we need several links in the index under line-breaking:
The following section could be pointed to from the index section about Text alignment & justification
The above means that we'd drop the links to 3.1 Line Composition Rules for Punctuation Marks.
How does that sound?
Personally, i'd prefer to break out the general information about what punctuation is used and what for, and move it under section 2, then reassign the other subsections under headings related to both line breaking and text-alignment, but i doubt that will happen.
We discussed that in a clreq telecon, and Eric said he would think more about how to reorganize the sections.
In the meantime, it seems to me that we need several links in the index under line-breaking:
- 3.1.4 Prohibition Rules for Line Start and Line End
- 3.1.5 Prohibition Rules for Unbreakable Marks
- 3.1.7 Hanging Punctuation at Line End
I added 3.1.4 and 3.1.5, but not 3.1.7. 3.1.7 does not seem to be related to line breaking to me. Would you please explain?
The following section could be pointed to from the index section about Text alignment & justification
- 3.1.6 Compression Rules for Punctuation Marks
Done.
The above means that we'd drop the links to 3.1 Line Composition Rules for Punctuation Marks.
Also done.
Updated the PR per discussion with @r12a offline.
Merging.
This section seems to be more relevant to line breaking. WDYT, @r12a?