clreq
clreq copied to clipboard
w3c
Requirements for Chinese Text Layout
This issue is applicable to languages that can be vertically set, especially Mongolian, since it has no horizontal setting. (Linked from: [Chinese](https://www.w3.org/TR/clreq-gap/#issue247_vertical_text) • [Japanese](https://www.w3.org/TR/jpan-gap/#issue167_vertical_text) • [Mongolian](https://www.w3.org/TR/mong-gap/#issue37_interaction)) In vertically set text,...
Do we need to write about the behavior of vertical form controls in clreq? Some examples:   Possibly wrong behavior:
规范中说道： > 排版上，《标点符号用法》规定问号与叹号连用时，占一个字位置；两个问号或叹号叠用时，占一个字位置；三个问号或叹号叠用时，占两个字位置。 > https://w3c.github.io/clreq/#exclamatory_question_marks 实际效果可能过于拥挤，调节为 1.5ic 是否更合适？  例如在：部编版八年级语文上册-阅读 17 昆明的雨(P86-P90) ，问号与叹号连用时右侧还有一定的空隙。 （当然，本身这个书本里的排版效果一般，需要更好的例证） 
I wrote a test about double-clicking on Chinese text. See a [summary of the result](https://w3c.github.io/i18n-tests/results/int-grapheme-word-segmentation.html#chinese). What would be the expectation of the average Chinese user for the case in https://github.com/w3c/glyph_character_tests/issues/30...
https://w3c.github.io/clreq/#first_line_indents > 所有段落首行皆缩排。几乎所有的书籍与杂志皆使用此方法。 对于网页和电子书，对于段首缩排和段间距的选择是否有不同之处？
标点挤压的例子
建议在[6.3.2.2节](https://www.w3.org/International/clreq/#h-adjustment_of_adjacent_punctuation_marks)和[6.3.2.3节](https://www.w3.org/International/clreq/#h-compression_of_punctuation_marks_at_line_start)添加几个标点挤压的例子，会显得更清晰一些。
https://www.w3.org/International/clreq/#h-punctuation_adjustment_space In Hong Kong and Taiwan, should the width of the centered comma, period, secondary comma, colon, semicolon and interpuncts be "adjustable"?