On Tue, 1 May 2012 13:57:19 +0100 Michael Everson <ever...@evertype.com> wrote: >As Andrew said, the examples you showed were not examples of vertical >text layout. They were examples of somebody rotating a text box.
Ahh, I see. >On 1 May 2012, at 13:43, suzuki toshiya wrote: > >>>You cannot rotate Canadian Syllabics because when you do the >>>letter-values change. The two examples you have shown are examples of >>>extremely bad typographic choices. >>OK, where I can see good examples? >I already mentioned crosswords. Otherwise, I don't know. >Vertical presentation of text isn't "normal" in Canadian >Syllabics (any more than it is in English, except in neon). I prefer neon, because I'm questionable if the crossword puzzle is good evidence to discuss the vertical text layout. The most crosswords are designed to mix both of horizontal and vertical texts, so the result is not guaranteed to be chosen freely. >Since Canadian Syllabics characters change their meaning when >seen sideways, setting text in the way those two documents did >it simply causes immediate confusion as to the legibility of >the text. I think this comment is reasonable (change their "sound"?). If so, the values in East Asian context (EAVO) should not be sideway but upright? Current draft of UTR#50 assigns "sideway" values to East Asian context. In addition, the glyphs for U+141C - U+142A, etc should be rendered as same with horizontal text? Or their positions should be changed, or some ligature should be formed? Regards, mpsuzuki
