On 2 Oct 2010, at 03:36, Charles Pritchard wrote: >> A very simple example of how much people overlook is the character 'ß' > ... And ? Often, people do not need to cater to every locale. [snip] > There are many use cases in the U.S., where accessibility is more important than > supporting pan-European languages. [snip] > Your other argument is that text editors should support "all" of the worlds languages. Nobody has that expectation. [snip] > Programmers get their specs from their clients. If their client only wants to support English, or some subset of languages, I don't see an issue. The HTML WG is chartered "to ensure HTML provides effective support for internationalization" (same as it's chartered "to ensure that the deliverables will satisfy accessibility requirements"). http://www.w3.org/2007/03/HTML-WG-charter.html The mission of the W3C's internationalization activity is "to ensure that W3C's formats and protocols are usable worldwide in all languages and in all writing systems". http://www.w3.org/International/about Real-world text is not hermetically sealed from other languages. Software supporting natural language entry should allow free text input in all languages as free text may include the odd word, /bon mot/, or quotation from another language. > If I wanted IME support, I'd use <input> or <textarea>, set opacity to zero, > or otherwise stylize that part of text entry. > > Tell me, how do I allow someone to edit text which is along a path? > Do I wait a few years for SVG contentEditable? Why do you think SVG contentEditable would take longer to design and implement than the necessary accessibility and internationalization features for "canvas"? > Such attitude is in deep conflict with the open and evolving nature of the web Designing text editing features that bar authors producing non-English content from participation would also be in conflict with the open nature of the web, would it not? -- Benjamin Hawkes-LewisReceived on Sunday, 3 October 2010 17:38:37 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 3 October 2010 17:38:38 GMT