W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2009

Re: [CSS21][css3-namespace][css3-page][css3-selectors][css3-content] Unicode Normalization

From: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 16:33:14 -0500
Message-ID: <7c2a12e20902051333g15d1f1adqe38bf556d01df2b2@mail.gmail.com>
To: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
Cc: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, public-i18n-core@w3.org, W3C Style List <www-style@w3.org>

On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org> wrote:
> Henri, I think that if we follow your argument we should expect to see far more ids such as id1, id2, id3, or aa, ab, ac... etc.  But actually people tend to regularly use id and class names that make some sense, are easy to remember, and relate to the topic at hand.  Well, if you speak and think in excellent English there's no big deal with codepoint for codepoint comparison.  But if you speak and think in Vietnamese, Burmese, Khmer, Tamil, Malayalam, Kannada, Telugu, Sinhala, Tlįchǫ Yatìi, Dënesųłįne, Dene Zhatié–Shihgot'ine, Gwich'in, Dɛnɛsųłįnɛ, Igbo, Yoruba, Arabic, Urdu, Azeri, Tibetan, Japanese, Chinese, Russian, Serbian, etc. etc. and especially if your content is in that language, then it wouldn't be so surprising that you would want to write class names and ids in that language too, and I think we need to investigate what is needed to support that.

It might be worth noting that Wikipedia produces
normalization-sensitive classes by the boatload.  Look at the classes
on the body element of, for instance,


Normalization should not be a significant problem in this particular
context, however, since MediaWiki uses NFC for everything, and custom
CSS/JS normally is stored in the wiki database (therefore normalized).
Received on Thursday, 5 February 2009 21:33:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:24 UTC