Re: [pagination] Draft pagination document now in GitHub and online

On 27/10/2013 14:41, Brady Duga wrote:
> I agree, we shouldn't be dropping languages, though perhaps what Dave
> meant was not out-of-scope for the group, but out of scope for his
> document. Though, that is still confusing - would it cover Chinese as
> currently written in Beijing, but not Chinese as currently written in
> Taipei? I think splitting along these arbitrary lines (LTR, top down) is
> dangerous and we should try to include all possible living languages in
> our requirements. For instance, tweaking the width of a space before a
> period while ignoring Tobira [1] seems short-sighted.

I think we need to continue to surface requirements for non-Latin 
scripts as quickly as possible - it has taken us a long time to get what 
requirements we have so far, but we have a long way to go to ensure that 
typography on the Web respects the needs of worldwide users inclusively 
and without bias.

Having said that, I don't believe that we need the document by Dave to 
represent all constituencies.

We already, as you know, have JLREQ to represent Japanese requirements, 
but the i18n WG is also producing separate documents, including a FPWD 
of Requirements for Hangul Text Layout and Typography[1], the Indic task 
force in the i18n IG is interested in producing something similar for 
Indic scripts, and we are about to publish Predefined Counter Styles[2], 
which reflects requirements for counters around the world.

I would like to think that at some point we might have other documents 
representing the typographic requirements of other cultures.

*What I think Dave should do*, however, is identify the scope of his 
document, ie. specify which communities his document aims to represent. 
(And this should probably be alluded to in the document title.)

Hope that helps,

RI
Internationalization Activity Lead, W3C



[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/klreq/

[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/predefined-counter-styles/

Received on Tuesday, 29 October 2013 09:46:31 UTC