W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > July to September 2005

Re: bidi discussion list was: Bidi Markup vs Unicode control characters

From: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 17:41:41 +0900
Message-Id: <6.0.0.20.2.20050815173829.02e8e930@itmail.it.aoyama.ac.jp>
To: Tex Texin <tex@xencraft.com>, Ognyan Kulev <ogi@fmi.uni-sofia.bg>
Cc: Stephen Deach <sdeach@adobe.com>, Addison Phillips <addison.phillips@quest.com>, www-international@w3.org, Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>, Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>

At 16:10 05/08/10, Tex Texin wrote:

 >So xml:lang might be suggestive, but it is not explicit or informative
 >enough to base bidi layout upon it alone.
 >
 >That's also why CSS doesn't just have "direction", but also
 >"unicode-bidi" (normal, embed, bidi-override)

With respect to overrides, you are right that xml:lang would not
provide enough information. But the reason for having two CSS
properties (rather than e.g. just one with the values
normal, embed-ltr, embed-rtl, override-ltr, override-rtl)
is mainly to make it easier to specify a stylesheet
(use CSS cascading and inheritance in intelligent ways).

The proposal to split into two properties came from Hakon Lie
when the two of us were working on bidi support in CSS.

Regards,    Martin. 
Received on Monday, 15 August 2005 10:10:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 19:17:05 GMT