- From: George Chavchanidze <gch@rmi.acnet.ge>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:16:38 -0400 (GMT)
- To: www-style@w3.org
CSS2.1 WD says: "Implementors are urged to implement these features, or correct bugs in their implementations, if they wish to see thsse features remain in this specification. New 'list-style-type' values: 'armenian', 'georgian', 'lower-greek'. Implementors should look at CSS3 Lists instead" AFAIK description of Georgian numbering given in CSS3 lists module is wrong. The right one is described in http://people.netscape.com/ftang/paper/unicode16/part2.html See also https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=287166 http://my.opera.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=69401#post812726 But the actual problem is not whether it is right or wrong. If browsers would implement this list-style-type property several centuries ago, then may be our ancestors would use it, but in modern Georgian this numbering system is not used at all. Therefore I think it is reasonable to replace ancient Georgian numbering systems with *much more useful* alphabetic system similar to lower-greek and lower-latin. Or even go further and define one alphabetic counter style and list-style-type with optional argument specifying Unicode range. In this case lower-roman will look like alphabetic(a-z) or just alphabetic upper-roman will be alphabetic(A-Z) lower-greek will be alphabetic(\3B1-\3C9) upper-cyrillic alphabetic(\410-\42F) georgian will be alphabetic(\10D0-\10F0) etc. Much less head ache for implementators, users, linguists and ethnologists and better functionality that covers many of CSS3 list styles.
Received on Wednesday, 15 June 2005 14:06:14 UTC