- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2003 14:30:53 -0700 (PDT)
- To: Tex Texin <tex@I18nGuy.com>
- Cc: "ishida@w3.org" <ishida@w3.org>, "'Martin Duerst'" <duerst@w3.org>, "public-i18n-geo@w3.org" <public-i18n-geo@w3.org>
On Sat, 5 Jul 2003, Ian Hickson wrote: > > If the directionality of an element is the same as its parent, then > nothing happens wrt bidi. Setting directionality in CSS is exactly > equivalent to using LRO, RLO, LRE, RLE, and PDF, depending on the values > of unicode-bidi and direction. It appears I misunderstood the CSS spec, my bad. The spec already says what you want. The 'direction' property on inline elements has no effect unless 'unicode-bidi' is set to 'embed' (for LRE/RLE) or 'bidi-override' (for LRO/RLO). On block-level elements it sets the paragraph directionality as per the bidi algorithm. >> To answer your last question, the information in the CSS 2.1 draft spec >> is incorrect if the element has unicode-bidi:embed set, the levels are >> different. The space will not travel to the front of the B. Therefore >> the spec should say that the description is accurate only if >> unicode-bidi:normal, the same way it points out white-space:normal must >> be set. > > Oh, right, I see. Yes, good point. I'll bring that up in the WG. Thanks. In fact, no, the 'unicode-bidi' property has to be set to 'embed' for the example to be correct. (Which is actually what it says, although not explicitly, by saying "where the <ltr> element represents a left-to-right embedding and the <rtl> element represents a right-to-left embedding"). -- Ian Hickson )\._.,--....,'``. fL "meow" /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. http://index.hixie.ch/ `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Saturday, 5 July 2003 17:30:29 UTC