- From: CE Whitehead <cewcathar@hotmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 19:30:27 -0400
- To: <public-i18n-bidi@w3.org>, <ehsan@mozilla.com>
- Message-ID: <SNT142-w3522DCC6D05D5D416C7317B3130@phx.gbl>
Hi. From: Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan@mozilla.com> Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 17:02:23 -0400 > On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 4:36 PM, CE Whitehead <cewcathar@hotmail.com> wrote: >> Hi! > From: Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan@mozilla.com> >> Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 20:48:10 -0400 >> To: public-i18n-bidi@w3.org >>> This mail had bounced... >> >>> What I actually mean is that setting the direction for img elements >>> doesn't actually have any effect on how the image is displayed or >>> layed out, so the img's direction can be "hijacked" to only affect the >>> directionality of the alt text. >> Thanks for your information on this. >> So you are saying that no additional directionality attribute is needed for >> the alt attribute? > Yes, that's what I'm proposing. >> (One note though: it may be clearer to content authors to have a >> directionality on the alt attribute rahter than only the img directionality >> attribute.) > My suggestion was in hopes of not adding attributes unless absolutely > necessary. > Otherwise, I don't feel strongly against adding an > attribute for alt text directionality anyway. Thanks. I don't feel that strongly myself so perhaps whether or not there is an altdir attribute will depend on how everyone else feels. Best, C. E. Whitehead cewcathar@hotmail.com > -- > Ehsan
Received on Sunday, 11 April 2010 23:31:00 UTC