- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 16:20:53 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10828 Aharon Lanin <aharon.lists.lanin@gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|FIXED | --- Comment #39 from Aharon Lanin <aharon.lists.lanin@gmail.com> 2010-12-23 16:20:53 UTC --- The reason that this bug was filed is expressed (by me) in comment 11: "What IE and Webkit do for <br> is treat it as a bidi paragraph break, despite the spec saying otherwise. This is not about to change, because what RTL users expect from <br> is bidi paragraph separation." Or, as fanatasai summarized it in comment 25, "Current definition of <br> is incompatible with widespread usage and implementation." Well, it turns out that part of these statements is out of date. As I learned a few days ago from Simon Mantagu, IE did change, to an extent. While IE7 indeed treated <br> as a bidi paragraph break, even in its standards mode, IE8 treats it as bidi whitespace (i.e. per the HTML4 spec) - when in *its* standards mode. IE8 continues to treat <br> as a bidi paragraph break in its quirks mode and its IE7 compatibility mode. I guess that this should not be surprising, given that IE's standards mode is about following standards, and HTML4 is the current standard. However, it did surprise me, since I thought I had tested this in IE8 before filing the bug. (I wasn't careful to make sure I was in IE8 standards mode.) Please note that the other part of the reason for filing this bug remains unaffected: despite the HTML spec limiting <br> to esoteric uses like poetry and addresses, most of the time that <br> is used, it is used as the HTML equivalent of a plain text newline. When used that way in a bidi document, it does not work as intended unless it is a bidi paragraph break. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 23 December 2010 16:20:55 UTC