Well, DIR/direction is used in both HTML and CSS to control the layout of tables and other higher-level (page-/column-/block-placement-level) layout issues, as well as the bidi behavior in spans. Unicode-bidi applies only to paragraph content & span-level objects; so splitting them in some way makes sense. It probably doesn't buy us much at this point in time to debate whether adding a property to control the higher-level layout issues and having the unicode-bidi property carry the combined embed-RTL, override-RTL, embed-LTR, override-LTR would have been better. At 2005.08.15-17:41(+0900), Martin Duerst wrote: >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. ---Steve Deach sdeach@adobe.comReceived on Monday, 15 August 2005 14:25:00 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 20 September 2007 14:34:19 GMT