W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > January to March 2013

[review feedback] qa-visual-vs-logical

From: Matitiahu Allouche <matitiahu.allouche@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 18:46:15 +0200
To: <www-international@w3.org>
Cc: "Richard Ishida" <ishida@w3.org>
Message-ID: <0ad701ce1440$ccea6960$66bf3c20$@gmail.com>
These are my comments on the document at http://www.w3.org/International/tutorials/new-bidi-xhtml/qa-visual-vs-logical

 

1) In section “Visual ordering and its shortcomings”, we find the sentence:
“In addition, all the extra tags needed to manage the text would bloat your code and impact not only authoring time, but also bandwidth.”

Considering the bandwidth available to most users and the small part taken by text as compared to images, sound and video, the above argument is rather feeble, IMHO, and can be removed.



2) In section “Visual ordering and character encodings”, you could add that specifying UTF-8 as character encoding implies that the ordering is logical. Thus the *only* valid encoding for visually ordered Hebrew text is ISO-8859-8.

In practice, user agents may decide whether the ordering is visual or logical based on heuristics rather than encoding. MS IE has been known to do that in past versions. I don’t know if it still does it in more recent versions.

 

 

Shalom (Regards),  Mati

 
Received on Tuesday, 26 February 2013 16:46:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 26 February 2013 16:46:51 GMT