W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-core@w3.org > April to June 2008

Re: [HTML5] i18n comment 4: Add rlo and lro values to dir

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 15:12:29 -0700
Message-ID: <4812574D.2060303@inkedblade.net>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
CC: ishida@w3.org, public-html-comments@w3.org, public-i18n-core@w3.org

Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 ishida@w3.org wrote:
>> Comment 4
>> At http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/0802-html5/
>>
>> Comment: Please consider allowing two new attribute values for the 
>> \"dir\" attribute: \'rlo\' and \'lro\'for dir. You do not need to remove 
>> the bdo element, but the new values will allow content authors to 
>> proceed to a scenario we described in the ITS 1.0 specification 
>> [http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-its-20070403/#directionality], It will 
>> also provide some additional power to the authors, since they will be 
>> able to attach dir=\"lro\" to a block element.
> 
> Could you elaborate on the use case here? Why would this be better than 
> the <bdo> element? Is the improvement enough to warrant the cost?
> 
> I looked at the ITS spec but could not see any reason to encourage authors 
> to do block-level direction overriding.

I'll note that CSS doesn't allow overrides to cross block-level boundaries.
<div style="direction: rtl; unicode-bidi: override;">
   This will be RTL override.
   <p>This will remain LTR.</p>
</div>

~fantasai
Received on Friday, 25 April 2008 22:14:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 October 2008 10:18:55 GMT