W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > November 2010

[Bug 10827] i18n comment 23 : script dialog text direction

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2010 11:52:29 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1PEKqL-0002fM-Ph@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10827

fantasai <fantasai.bugs@inkedblade.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |fantasai.bugs@inkedblade.ne
                   |                            |t

--- Comment #6 from fantasai <fantasai.bugs@inkedblade.net> 2010-11-05 11:52:29 UTC ---
Looking at the diff, I think you are introducing some confusion with your
terminology.

+  Text from scripts (e.g. the argument to
+  <code title="dom-alert">window.alert()</code>) is expected to be
+  rendered as a separate bidirectional algorithm paragraph. <a
+  href="#refsBIDI">[BIDI]</a></p>

Minor comment: as worded, I would s/separate/independent/

But either way, there is some confusion here as I believe it is expected for
hard line breaks like CRLF to break the bidi paragraph (as well as the line).
That is, the text is not rendered as "a" bidi paragraph, it may potentially be
rendered as multiple bidi paragraphs.

Perhaps something like
Text from scripts (e.g. the argument to window.alert()) is expected to be
rendered as Unicode plain text. For example, the line and paragraph-breaking
behavior of LF is honored, and the base direction of each bidi paragraph is
determined according to Unicode's detection rules. [BIDI]
?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 5 November 2010 11:52:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 5 November 2010 11:52:34 GMT