Re: [CSS Counter Styles] Tamil (was: Minutes Santa Clara F2F 2014-10-28 Part III: Text, Selections, Counter Styles)

> On Jan 3, 2015, at 7:04 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Jan 2, 2015 10:15 AM, "Jonathan Kew" <jfkthame@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 2/1/15 14:53, Dael Jackson wrote:
> >
> >>    TabAtkins: One issue was about a handful of styles that browsers
> >>               have implemented but weren't in the draft since we cut
> >>               it down. I want to add the ones with high
> >>               interoperability.
> >>    TabAtkins: About 20 styles are implemented since they are
> >>               dependable for authors.
> >>    TabAtkins: The ones that aren't clear is the Tamil style, which is
> >>               only Firefox and this list:
> >>    <TabAtkins> afar, oromo, sidama, tigre
> >
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> >>    RESOLVED: Add to Counter Styles the additional styles supported by
> >>              2+ browsers (per r12a's email), do not add the styles
> >>              supported by only one browser.
> >
> >
> > AIUI, this implies that Tamil will be excluded from the predefined styles, as it is currently supported only by Firefox.
> >
> > I believe this would be a very unfortunate situation. Tamil is one of the nine basic scripts of India (see [1], for example):
> >
> >   Bengali
> >   Devanagari
> >   Gujarati
> >   Gurmukhi
> >   Kannada
> >   Malayalam
> >   Oriya [Odia]
> >   Tamil
> >   Telugu
> >
> > These are the Indic-family scripts used (along with Latin script, for English, and the Perso-Arabic script for Urdu and Sindhi) to write the official state languages of India, and form a clear, well-understood set that are expected to be treated on an equal footing.
> >
> > To provide predefined counter styles for eight of these, and exclude the ninth, will appear arbitrary and capricious; will be confusing to authors; and may even lead to accusations of discrimination against one of India's major linguistic communities.
> >
> > Please reconsider the status of Tamil. The nine major Indian scripts should be supported as a set of equals, not divided into what will appear to be first- and second-class citizens.
> 
> Our decision to leave Tamil out was based on a simple impl-based criteria. I was not aware that we had included the other 8 major Indian languages. The hole is probably very obvious for Indian-language speakers, and unfortunately easy to misinterpret. I agree that we should include Tamil despite it having only one current implementation
> 

Maybe you could get Google to support it.