W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2014

Re: [css3-writing-modes] i18n-ISSUE-167: Example of Bidirectional Text

From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 15:39:04 +0100
Message-ID: <53A05308.1070109@w3.org>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
CC: W3C Style <www-style@w3.org>, www International <www-international@w3.org>
On 26/11/2012 21:35, fantasai wrote:
> On 10/17/2012 10:01 AM, Richard Ishida wrote:
>> Example of Bidirectional Text
>> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-writing-modes/#bidi-example
>>
>> I've been meaning to say for some years now that this is a very bad
>> example. It should use dedicated bidi specific markup (see
>> http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-bidi-css-markup#markup
>> "You should therefore use dedicated bidi markup whenever
>> it is available. Do not simply attach CSS styling to a general element
>> to achieve the effect."). Here is an proposal for an
>> alternative version of parts of the example.
>
> I switched the example to use DocBook. Take a look and let me know if
> it's good?

Much better. Thanks.


>> /* Rules for bidi */
>> *[dir=rtl] {direction: rtl; unicode-bidi: embed;}
>> *[dir=ltr] {direction: ltr; unicode-bidi: embed;}
>>
>> These generic style rules should be what goes in the separate style
>> sheet.
>
> Not sure I handled thispart as you want; I think you want me to adjust
> the prose somehow?


I think it's ok, thanks.  However the indent after the first line of 
those paragraphs looks a bit odd to me - was it intentional?  I think 
i'd also make the explanatory text proportionally-spaced, if it was up 
to me (like the first para of the example).


>
>> Also, we recommend not using bidi markup unless you need to change the
>> base direction, so if this document had an overall base
>> direction of ltr (either by default, or via <ROOT dir="ltr">), you
>> wouldn't need to have the dir="ltr" after ENGLISH. It may
>> be worth adding a note to that effect.
>
> I think it's not that important to point out here.

Ok.

>
>> It's also confusing that the markup is in uppercase, since the
>> uppercase is used to indicate Hebrew characters. Unless you are
>> trying to make a point that the markup uses hebrew element names
>> (which I don't think is necessary here), they should probably
>> be in lowercase.
>
> Good point. Fixed.

Thanks.

One further editorial change that may help is to move the following text 
immediately after the CSS code:

[[
The formatting of this text might look like this if the line length is long:
...
Note that the <quote> embedding causes HEBREW18 to be to the right of 
english19.
]]

That would make it easier to understand when you say things like "Thus, 
the first two <para>s are read starting at the top right, the final 
three are read starting at the top left", because at the moment that 
appears to refer to the source code, which is in logical order, and so 
is rather confusing.

If you don't want to move it, maybe add something like "in the displayed 
text" to explain where the reader should be looking.

One final suggestion: do we need to have hyphenation in the lower 
example of displayed text?  Also the right-aligned lines are not 
properly right-aligned.


RI


PS: I still have another comment in a separate email about adding 
unicode-bidi: isolate to the CSS.

And Jirka made a couple of suggestions about the DocBook syntax.
Received on Tuesday, 17 June 2014 14:39:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:22 UTC