W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2008

Re: [CSS3] ltr and rtl pseudo-class proposal

From: Ambrose Li <ambrose.li@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 14:36:31 -0400
Message-ID: <af2cae770803171136l5bd3d193q3061532384d839bd@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Alan Gresley" <alan@css-class.com>
Cc: "Justin Rogers" <justrog@microsoft.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, "robert@ocallahan.org" <robert@ocallahan.org>, "Andrew Fedoniouk" <news@terrainformatica.com>

On 17/03/2008, Alan Gresley <alan@css-class.com> wrote:
> Yes you are correct but I really miss the point why there is such a pseudo class as :lang in the first place since it's does nothing once the style sheet is disabled. I believe that [lang="val"] is much more suited and the semantic meaning is always in the source (accessible).
>
>
>  [lang="fr"] {..}
>
>  <span lang="fr"> ... </span>
>
>  [lang|="fr"] {..}
>
>  <html lang="fr"> ... </html>

No, :lang and [lang="fr"] are very different things. To give you a
more concrete example (the kind of things I run into every day),
consider

<p lang=en> ... <cite>foo</cite> ... </p>

A [lang="en"] rule would not even match the CITE element. If such
matching is important (e.g., for proper display of English in a
Chinese page), the results are disastrous.

Because :lang did not work when I set up my sites, I have lots of
rules in the form of [lang=foo] * or even [lang=foo] * * so that
things can be more-or-less properly styled. It is a complete
nightmare.
-- 
cheers,
-ambrose

Yahoo and Gmail must die. Yes, I use them, but they still must die.
PS: Don't trust everything you read in Wikipedia. (Very Important)
Received on Monday, 17 March 2008 18:37:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:55:02 GMT