- From: John Gregg <johnnyg@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 13:29:09 -0700
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Drew Wilson <atwilson@google.com>, Doug Turner <dougt@dougt.org>, Web Notification WG <public-web-notification@w3.org>
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com> wrote: > On Wed, 13 Oct 2010 21:25:03 +0200, Drew Wilson <atwilson@google.com> wrote: >> >> I'd be concerned about excluding support for rtl locales merely because >> some lowest-common-denominator system platform does not support it, but I'm >> optimistic we can come up with some sort of solution that minimizes >> incompatibility. Is there a problem with just stating that the rtl >> attribute may not be supported (i.e. ignored) on all system platforms? In >> practice, if a user installs a platform that does not support rtl >> notifications, then I'm hard-pressed to expect they'll be confused when that >> platform doesn't >> display rtl notifications. > > We don't have LTR/RTL indicators for alert() etc. Why are they needed here? > I believe that is generally seen as a shortcoming, not something to be used as a model, considering http://www.w3.org/TR/html-bidi/#script-dialog -John
Received on Wednesday, 13 October 2010 20:29:39 UTC