W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > July to September 2007

Re: FAQ: CSS vs. markup for bidi support

From: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:12:17 +0200
To: "Richard Ishida" <ishida@w3.org>, "'WWW International'" <www-international@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.txtiqrlysmjzpq@acer3010.lan>

>> On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 19:34:35 +0200, Richard Ishida
>> <ishida@w3.org> wrote:
>>
>> > I see
>> >
>> > "When the user agent claims to support facilities defined
>> within this
>> > specification or required by this specification through normative
>> > reference, it must do so in ways consistent with the facilities'
>> > definition."
>> >
>> > Where
>> >
>> > "Facilities are elements, attributes, and the semantics associated
>> > with those elements and attributes."
>> >
>> > I'm assuming, however, that the facilities' definition is
>> given by the
>> > HTML
>> > 4.01 spec.  I'm struggling to find any normative text that says so.
>> >

You'll find the text:
"The semantics of the elements and their attributes are defined in the W3C  
Recommendation for HTML 4."

and the reference for HTML given is:
[HTML]
"HTML 4.01 Specification", D. Raggett, A. Le Hors, I. Jacobs, 24 December  
1999.
Latest version available at: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401

Hope this helps.

Best wishes,

Steven

>> >
>> >
>> > RI
>> >
>> >
>> > ============
>> > Richard Ishida
>> > Internationalization Lead
>> > W3C (World Wide Web Consortium)
>> > http://www.w3.org/People/Ishida/
>> > http://www.w3.org/International/
>> > http://people.w3.org/rishida/blog/
>> > http://www.flickr.com/photos/ishida/
>> >
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: www-international-request@w3.org
>> >> [mailto:www-international-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of
>> Richard Ishida
>> >> Sent: 28 August 2007 18:14
>> >> To: 'Bert Bos'; 'WWW International'
>> >> Cc: 'fantasai'
>> >> Subject: RE: FAQ: CSS vs. markup for bidi support
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > XHTML (application/xhtml+xml), however, *does* have meaning.
>> >> > The XHTML specification says pretty much that the meaning of the
>> >> > mark-up is the same as that of similar HTML mark-up.
>> >>
>> >> Bert, I looked for that in the XHTML 1.0 spec, and I just
>> >> double-checked, but couldn't find it.  Can you point to
>> the relevant
>> >> wording?
>> >>
>> >> RI
>> >> ============
>> >> Richard Ishida
>> >> Internationalization Lead
>> >> W3C (World Wide Web Consortium)
>> >>
>> >> http://www.w3.org/People/Ishida/
>> >> http://www.w3.org/International/
>> >> http://people.w3.org/rishida/blog/
>> >> http://www.flickr.com/photos/ishida/
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > -----Original Message-----
>> >> > From: Bert Bos [mailto:bert@w3.org]
>> >> > Sent: 28 August 2007 16:59
>> >> > To: 'WWW International'
>> >> > Cc: fantasai; 'Richard Ishida'
>> >> > Subject: Re: FAQ: CSS vs. markup for bidi support
>> >> >
>> >> > On Tuesday 28 August 2007 16:22, fantasai wrote:
>> >> > > I was looking at
>> >> > >    http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-bidi-css-markup
>> >> > > yesterday and noticed that there's still a major error in this
>> >> > > section:
>> >> > >
>> http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-bidi-css-markup#xhtm
>> >> > > l
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Specifically, because namespacing allows XHTML to be
>> >> recognized as
>> >> > > XHTML even in compound documents, XHTML 'dir' attributes
>> >> > should work
>> >> > > in browsers even when the document is served as XML.
>> >> >
>> >> > That's not so clear. I think you should distinguish
>> known document
>> >> > types from generic XML.
>> >> >
>> >> > The meaning of every bit of mark-up depends on the context
>> >> in which it
>> >> > is used, starting from the MIME type of the document as a
>> >> whole. E.g.,
>> >> > the fact that
>> >> >
>> >> >     <h:li>The second item.</h:li>
>> >> >
>> >> > is displayed as
>> >> >
>> >> >     2. The second item.
>> >> >
>> >> > is not because the meaning of h:li elements is to
>> display "2.", but
>> >> > because it happens to be the second element in another
>> element that
>> >> > happens to be a list in the context of this document.
>> >> >
>> >> > Namespaces are no different from attributes in that respect.
>> >> > They are more difficult to understand and handle because
>> they are
>> >> > inherited and abbreviated, but otherwise they are just
>> >> mark-up, i.e.,
>> >> > syntax, without any inherent, context-independent
>> meaning. E.g., a
>> >> > namespace in an XSLT document has a very different function
>> >> from one
>> >> > in an RDF document, which is again different from a WICD.
>> >> >
>> >> > It is, of course, bad practice to use namespaces in
>> >> unexpected ways in
>> >> > different documents, just as it is bad practice to use
>> the "wrong"
>> >> > names for elements (you don't call a list item <red-cow>,
>> >> even though
>> >> > the computer doesn't care), but sometimes it's unavoidable.
>> >> >
>> >> > Which means, in brief, that seeing an h:dir attribute
>> >> outside of XHTML
>> >> > (where h is the namespace of XHTML, which I don't know by heart),
>> >> > *suggests* that the enclosing element is to be rendered
>> >> with a certain
>> >> > writing direction, but you can't be sure, unless you
>> start with the
>> >> > MIME type and that MIME type's RFC and work your way through the
>> >> > document with the specification in hand.
>> >> >
>> >> > A text/xml or application/xml document has, by definition,
>> >> no meaning
>> >> > other than what the style sheet PI (if any) provides.
>> >> > XHTML (application/xhtml+xml), however, *does* have meaning.
>> >> > The XHTML specification says pretty much that the meaning of the
>> >> > mark-up is the same as that of similar HTML mark-up.
>> >> >
>> >> > So I agree that the quoted FAQ is incorrect for XHTML ("dir"
>> >> > works without any style rules), but I believe it is correct for
>> >> > generic XML ("dir" needs style rules to work).
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Bert
>> >> > --
>> >> >   Bert Bos                                ( W 3 C )
>> >> http://www.w3.org/
>> >> >   http://www.w3.org/people/bos
>> >>  W3C/ERCIM
>> >> >   bert@w3.org                             2004 Rt des
>> >> Lucioles / BP 93
>> >> >   +33 (0)4 92 38 76 92            06902 Sophia Antipolis
>> >> Cedex, France
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>
Received on Wednesday, 29 August 2007 11:12:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 19:17:14 GMT