Re: [csswg-drafts] [css-text] Writing System prose is currently unimplementable on ICU (#4445)

The CSS Working Group just discussed `[css-text] Writing System prose is currently unimplementable on ICU`, and agreed to the following:

* `RESOLVED: Mark this section at risk`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;RossenF2F> Topic: [css-text] Writing System prose is currently unimplementable on ICU<br>
&lt;RossenF2F> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4445<br>
&lt;emilio> florian: so css-text that says that line-breaking can be changed language behavior<br>
&lt;emilio> line-breaking behavior can be changed by language*<br>
&lt;emilio> ... most impls use ICU<br>
&lt;emilio> ... but the spec says it should depend on the writing-system, not just language<br>
&lt;emilio> ... and nobody does it<br>
&lt;emilio> ... my feeling it's we'll get there slowly, and it's just not implemented yet<br>
&lt;emilio> ... unless we have an objection against it I think we should keep it in the spec<br>
&lt;emilio> hober: do you think ICU has a bug?<br>
&lt;emilio> florian: whether it's a bug or a feature is fuzzy but sure<br>
&lt;emilio> fantasai: I think we don't want to remove that restriction just because ICU doesn't implement it<br>
&lt;koji> q+<br>
&lt;jfkthame> q+<br>
&lt;emilio> hober: I think we should file an ICU bug and if they wontfix remove this from the spec because everybody uses ICU<br>
&lt;emilio> florian: seems reasonable<br>
&lt;emilio> stantonm: I thought ICU took the language tag as an input<br>
&lt;emilio> fantasai: they do but they ignore the script part<br>
&lt;RossenF2F> q?<br>
&lt;emilio> astearns: should we mark this at risk pointing to the bug?<br>
&lt;RossenF2F> Zakim, close queue<br>
&lt;Zakim> ok, RossenF2F, the speaker queue is closed<br>
&lt;emilio> hober: given we're dependent on ICU here I agree<br>
&lt;florian> q?<br>
&lt;emilio> koji: is there any use case for this?<br>
&lt;emilio> ... I see the spec point of view but don't see any<br>
&lt;RossenF2F> ack koji<br>
&lt;emilio> fantasai: there are different languages that can be written in multiple writing systems like japanese or chinese text books<br>
&lt;emilio> ... they use latin letters, but you don't want to format them as english<br>
&lt;emilio> koji: but justification / font-selection / etc don't change by writing system<br>
&lt;emilio> ... it probably should change<br>
&lt;emilio> florian: justification does change in the arabic / cyrillic languages sometimes<br>
&lt;stantonm> s/I thought ICU took the language tag as an input/I thought ICU took the BCP-47 language tag as an input, which includes script/<br>
&lt;emilio> ... if you have a book that's written in japanese-latin you shouldn't use a japanese font<br>
&lt;emilio> koji: that seems fine to me<br>
&lt;florian> q?<br>
&lt;emilio> chris: a better example, turkish used to be written in the arabic alphabet<br>
&lt;emilio> jfkthame: I'm totally in agreement about filing a bug against ICU<br>
&lt;dbaron> some other examples might be Mongolian, Tajik, or Uzbek<br>
&lt;fantasai> i/jfkthame/chris: wouldn't you want to use an Arabic font for old turkish?<br>
&lt;emilio> ... but I disagree with the idea of ripping it of the spec if the bug is wontfix<br>
&lt;dbaron> (Tajik and Uzbek, according to Wikipedia, have had 3 scripts at different times: Arabic, Latin, and Cyrillic.)<br>
&lt;emilio> ... I think this is correct behavior and browsers could implement it with additional processing on top of ICU<br>
&lt;emilio> hober: goal of the spec is interoperability, if it's wontfix it'd be science fiction<br>
&lt;emilio> ACTION: florian file a bug with ICU on this<br>
&lt;hober> s/if it's/if the ICU bug is/<br>
&lt;emilio> jfkthame: Firefox is not using ICU<br>
&lt;emilio> ... and we'd like to fix this<br>
&lt;fantasai> faceless: We implement this correctly<br>
&lt;emilio> RESOLVED: Mark this section at risk<br>
&lt;fantasai> s/risk/risk, and close the issue/<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4445#issuecomment-578122943 using your GitHub account

Received on Friday, 24 January 2020 13:07:47 UTC