W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-bugzilla@w3.org > December 2012

[Bug 19505] Describe visual direction when document encoding is iso-8859-8

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 10:56:39 +0000
To: public-css-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-19505-5148-ZVr9H2uANo@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19505

--- Comment #18 from Martin Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> ---
(In reply to comment #17)
> (In reply to comment #12)
> > Hmm. You could probably get most of the way there with
> >   * { unicode-bidi: bidi-override; }
> >   input, textarea, etc. { unicode-bidi: normal; }
> 
> So this would be specific to where the encoding is iso-8859-8-i?

Yes.

> If we make
> it *|* and add that to the HTML rendering section it should cover
> text/plain, text/xml etc.

Great.

> Martin, either we document it so new players know what to implement to
> interoperate with existing clients, or we remove it from existing clients. I
> don't think it's responsible to leave things lingering. (And it's not that
> much trouble anyway.)

Well, something like the above stylesheet is indeed not too much trouble;
that's why I suggested it in #c6. If we try to find all the special cases in
current implementations (as fantasai has started to do), then it's probably a
lot of work.

So now the question is (a) whether browser vendors would be willing to converge
to something like the above stylesheet, and (b) whether there are any serious
number of pages out there where something like the above stylesheet isn't good
enough. I'm not the right person to answer either (a) or (b). My general
implementation experience tells me that specing it like above would make it
easier for new market entrants than if there were lots of special cases.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 3 December 2012 10:57:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 3 December 2012 10:57:11 GMT