W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-font@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: I18N-ISSUE-6: Localization mechanism too restricted [WOFF]

From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 10:01:25 +0100
Message-ID: <4DE75165.6030602@w3.org>
To: "public-i18n-core@w3.org" <public-i18n-core@w3.org>, www-font@w3.org
[resending because previously was sent to the wrong i18n list]

On 02/06/2011 09:15, Richard Ishida wrote:
> The i18n WG discussed this during a telecon and would still prefer to
> see alternative elements for localized text for vendor, credit and
> licensee information.
> One reason for this is that mixing Arabic/Hebrew/Thaana and other
> scripts, especially where punctuation is involved, can lead to problems
> for assuring correct directional display of characters. Having separate
> elements that can be marked up with dir attributes can alleviate this
> problem.
> For the i18n WG,
> RI
> On 15/12/2010 19:21, public-i18n-core-request@w3.org wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Internationalization Core Working
>> Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
>>> I18N-ISSUE-6: Localization mechanism too restricted [WOFF]
>>> http://www.w3.org/International/track/issues/6
>>> Raised by: Richard Ishida
>>> On product: WOFF
>>> 6.2.1 Extended Metadata Block
>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/WOFF/#Metadata
>>> WG Reviewed: Yes
>>> A Japanese font vendor would probably want a Japanese audience to see
>>> its name in kanji, but present a Latin transcription to non-Japanese
>>> viewers. To enable this, the localised version access mechanism (ie.
>>> use of the text element) should also apply to the content of the
>>> vendor element.
>>> Likewise, a Tamil font designer would probably want their name in the
>>> credit element to be available in either Tamil or Latin scripts.
>>> I'm therefore proposing that you extend the localization selection
>>> mechanism to vendor, credit and licensee elements (which would also
>>> reinforce the comment that proposes that the content of these elements
>>> be element content rather than attribute values).
>>> I am assuming that this would not apply to the uniqueid element, by
>>> definition (even though it would be possible for markup authors to use
>>> non-ASCII text in the id itself).
>> Is the only expected issue the name of vendors? Can this be addressed
>> simply through normal use of a parenthesized aside to indicate an
>> alternate representation of the name? Like "????????? (Hitachi)"?
>> ~TJ

Richard Ishida
Internationalization Activity Lead
W3C (World Wide Web Consortium)

Received on Thursday, 2 June 2011 09:01:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:01:43 UTC