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

Re: [css3-writing-modes] unicode-bidi

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 11:02:00 -0700
Message-ID: <4DDAA118.1050101@inkedblade.net>
To: www-style@w3.org, "public-i18n-bidi@w3.org" <public-i18n-bidi@w3.org>
On 05/23/2011 01:32 AM, Simon Montagu wrote:
>
> |If 'direction' has the value 'rtl', should the image be considered as
> |having character type R or AL? Consider the case of an image in Arabic
> |text followed by a mathematical formula.
> |
> |Does this section apply to inline replaced elements with textual
> |content, for example form controls?
>
> Back in 2011, I have some questions about the new syntax
>
> Value: normal | [[ embed | isolate ] || [ plaintext | bidi-override ]]
>
> This seems to permit some combinations that don't make sense,
> which should probably be addressed in the prose.
>
> 1) "unicode-bidi: embed bidi-override"
>
> It isn't possible to honor both of these values. Which should win?
>
> 2) "unicode-bidi: embed plaintext"
>
> This case is I suppose already covered in the prose, since it's
> specified that "embed" has no effect on elements that are not
> inline and "plaintext" has no effect on inline elements.
>
> See also David Baron's comments at
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=613149#c5

Hm, that seems silly. I think I just need to correct the grammar. :)
I believe it should be
   normal | embed | [ bidi-override || isolate ] | plaintext
or maybe
   normal | embed | [ isolate || [ plaintext | bidi-override ] ]

I've changed it to the former and added that 'plaintext' means
'isolate' when applied to an inline element.

Does that seem fine?

~fantasai
Received on Monday, 23 May 2011 18:03:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:40 GMT