- From: ebraminio via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2017 07:01:00 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Again I can not agree with last sentence of Khaled here as I don't see the situation same with rectangle like letters of CJK and I also don't think keeping the underline unchanged is equally bad or is not helpful. I hope others Arabic/Persian speakers comments would shed some light on this but I am just bringing Khaled's mentioned text on both `skip: ink` and without for their judge:   To me, this is not very different than real world English `skip: ink`s ([link](https://youtu.be/OQ5jsbhAv_M?t=1955)) but maybe is just a new looking thing for Arabic text (which I believe on a better direction):  Some other interesting to know facts, currently Arabic Wikipedia is totally disabled links hover underline for some reason but as their decision was affected Persian Wikipedia, we had to revert their change on [Persian Wikipedia](https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/75570/) (there is a false fact about Amiri on the commit message, please ignore) as it was causing UI/UX inconsistency, and, Central Kurdish Wikipedia also was interested on our change so I [applied that](https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/99701/) for them also. Also some Persian news agency websites like [Tabnak](http://tabnak.ir/) had disabled links underline and I believe if they asked about the reason, they would mention dots legibility issue with underline as one the reason (if not top) so current situation with underline on Arabic is it self not great (I don't like here to be accused of implying that `skip: ink` is making it better, even the fact, I believe it doesn't making the situation worse if not making it better) After all, -- GitHub Notification of comment by ebraminio Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/727#issuecomment-271134309 using your GitHub account
Received on Sunday, 8 January 2017 07:01:12 UTC