W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-i18n-comments@w3.org > April 2004

Clarify "character technology misuse"

From: Björn Höhrmann <bjoern@hoehrmann.de>
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2004 06:41:20 +0900
Cc: bjoern@hoehrmann.de (Björn Höhrmann)
Message-Id: <113159101.20040408214119@toro.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp>
To: www-i18n-comments@w3.org

This is a last call comment from Björn Höhrmann (bjoern@hoehrmann.de) on
the Character Model for the World Wide Web 1.0
(http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-charmod-20020430/).

Semi-structured version of the comment:

Submitted by: Björn Höhrmann (bjoern@hoehrmann.de)
Submitted on behalf of (maybe empty): 
Comment type: other
Chapter/section the comment applies to: 4.5 Private use code points
The comment will be visible to: public
Comment title: Clarify "character technology misuse"
Comment:
Section 4.5, Private use code points:

[...]
  C069 [C] Content SHOULD NOT misuse character technology for pictures
  or graphics.
[...]

C068 and C069 are misplaced in section 4.5, the section is about private use code points, not about proper use of characters. There should be a clarification what the specification considers misuse. Unicode contains a number of characters that could be used as a replacement for many common graphics or ASCII art on the web. Is it misuse to use e.g.

  <span style = 'font-size: xx-large'>&#x2601;</span>

in a weather forecast? Or should I use

  <img src = 'cloud' ...>

The former is in fact troublesome, maybe it should be written as e.g.

  <abbr title='cloudy'>&#x2601;</abbr>

but then I am not sure how a voice browser would render U+2601 anyway. Maybe a number of Unicode characters are just a more advanced form of
ASCII art and should indeed be replaced by graphics with proper (often empty) alternate text... There should be at least some discussion with illustrative examples to clarify what this means and what issues are involved, this requirement would otherwise have no real effect in practise.


Structured version of  the comment:

<lc-comment
  visibility="public" status="pending"
  decision="pending" impact="pending" id="LC-">
  <originator email="bjoern@hoehrmann.de"
      >Björn Höhrmann</originator>
  <represents email=""
      >-</represents>
  <charmod-section href='http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-charmod-20040225/#sec-PrivateUse'
    >4.5</charmod-section>
  <title>Clarify &#x22;character technology misuse&#x22;</title>
  <description>
    <comment>
      <dated-link date="2004-04-08"
         href="http://www.w3.org/mid/113159101.20040408214119@toro.w3.mag.keio.ac.jp"
        >Clarify "character technology misuse"</dated-link>
      <para>Section 4.5, Private use code points:

[...]
  C069 [C] Content SHOULD NOT misuse character technology for pictures
  or graphics.
[...]

C068 and C069 are misplaced in section 4.5, the section is about private use code points, not about proper use of characters. There should be a clarification what the specification considers misuse. Unicode contains a number of characters that could be used as a replacement for many common graphics or ASCII art on the web. Is it misuse to use e.g.

  &#x3C;span style = &#x27;font-size: xx-large&#x27;&#x3E;&#x26;#x2601;&#x3C;/span&#x3E;

in a weather forecast? Or should I use

  &#x3C;img src = &#x27;cloud&#x27; ...&#x3E;

The former is in fact troublesome, maybe it should be written as e.g.

  &#x3C;abbr title=&#x27;cloudy&#x27;&#x3E;&#x26;#x2601;&#x3C;/abbr&#x3E;

but then I am not sure how a voice browser would render U+2601 anyway. Maybe a number of Unicode characters are just a more advanced form of
ASCII art and should indeed be replaced by graphics with proper (often empty) alternate text... There should be at least some discussion with illustrative examples to clarify what this means and what issues are involved, this requirement would otherwise have no real effect in practise.</para>
    </comment>
  </description>
</lc-comment>
Received on Thursday, 8 April 2004 17:41:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:32:34 GMT