W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2011

Re: Unicode normalization in CSS

From: Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 14:47:27 +0900
Message-ID: <4E00306F.9040405@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
CC: "Phillips, Addison" <addison@lab126.com>, "public-i18n-core@w3.org" <public-i18n-core@w3.org>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>


On 2011/06/20 19:19, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Jun 2011 19:46:28 +0200, Phillips, Addison
> <addison@lab126.com> wrote:
>> I fail to see what the size of the code units (or choice of Unicode
>> encoding form) have to do with it?
>
> That is how text streams are exposed to authors through the DOM and
> ECMAScript for better or worse.

That's true, but I agree with Addison that it's irrelevant.

>> Sequences of code points and their comparison are the issue and it
>> would not be a revolution to do so in a normalized manner.
>
> I do not think it is particularly problematic if we just leave it as is.
> In the particular case of CSS namespace prefixes it would even require
> the CSS resource to be in several different Unicode normalization forms.
> That is just bad practice.

I agree with Anne that it's quite low priority for CSS identifiers, in 
particular CSS namespace.


>> Normalization of stylesheets and other documents may not make sense,

Normalization of stylesheets, or more correctly normalization of 
stylesheets and the Web pages where they get used (to take care of class 
and id values that appear in selectors), makes quite a bit of sense.

Regards,    Martin.

>> but that doesn't address the problem of selection. See my recent
>> emails and the I18N WG's work on same.
>
> Can you please give a reference? What exactly do you mean with the
> problem of selection?
Received on Tuesday, 21 June 2011 05:48:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:41 GMT