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

[Bug 10811] i18n comment 6 : U+2028 and U+2029 in dialog text

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2010 21:18:07 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1P3bNH-0007Y6-CO@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10811

Aharon Lanin <aharon.lists.lanin@gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |aharon.lists.lanin@gmail.co
                   |                            |m

--- Comment #3 from Aharon Lanin <aharon.lists.lanin@gmail.com> 2010-10-06 21:18:06 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > Currently HTML doesn't specify anything about how the text shown in dialogs
> > (such as via alert()). It would be odd to have only this one requirement.
> 
> That's true, but why is it sufficient reason to exclude this from the HTML5
> specification?
> 
> > If HTML does specify anything about how the text in a dialog is rendered, it
> > would probably be best to defer to CSS.
> 
> I find this argument weak, as there is currently no way for CSS to affect how
> context in such dialogs is rendered.

Also, this is not at all a good match for CSS. Bidi ordering is not just a
matter of presentation. Although CSS has bidi properties like direction and
unicode-bidi, these are only properly used to implement HTML mark-up (dir
attribute, bdo element). For documents, the recommendation is to use HTML
mark-up, not them. See
<http://www.w3.org/TR/i18n-html-tech-bidi/#ri20030728.092130948>.

-- 
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 Wednesday, 6 October 2010 21:18:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:30:59 UTC