Re: titledir

See below

On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 7:21 PM, Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan@mozilla.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 6:01 AM, Aharon (Vladimir) Lanin
> <aharon@google.com> wrote:
> >> As far as I know, the longdesc attribute points to a URL, and
> >> therefore is not subject to the same considerations as the title
> >> attribute.
> > You have a point. And given that no browser actually supports longdesc,
> it's
> > best to simply not mention it.
>
> Agreed.
>
> >> The alt attribute, as applied to images, _can_ potentially
> >> be subject to the same concern [as the title attribute], IMO.
> >> However, I think in order to
> >> determine the direction of the alternate text, I think it should be
> >> safe to specify that user agents are supposed to use the value of the
> >> dir attribute on the img element (or its computed CSS direction).
> > It is indeed the intent to propose, for both alt and title, that their
> > direction should be specified by the element's computed direction (which
> can
> > be set by its dir attribute). However, for title, we are proposing a way
> to
> > override it with titledir because it is not unreasonable to want an
> > opposite-direction title on an element.
>
> I agree with all of the above.
>
> > Although obviously nothing prevents
> > an author from doing the same in alt, I don't think that it is a good
> idea
> > for the author to do that, and so I don't think that we should encourage
> it
> > by giving a way to specify it.
>
> Hmm, I'm still not sure why you don't think it's a good idea for an
> Author to do that.  Let me give an example.  Let's consider the case
> where in an RTL page, I want to show a European address (which should
> be written in LTR) on a map as a static image displayed using an img
> tag.  In order to support the users who have turned image display off,
> for example, I may put the address as the alternate text for the
> image.  But the address will be displayed in RTL mode, which is not
> what I intend.  I don't see what's different about this use case
> compared to the one you suggested for supporting @titledir for @title.
>

There is no reason that the <img> here shouldn't have a dir=ltr on it.


> >> Furthermore, I don't see why we need to explicitly specify that the
> >> titledir attribute should not have a CSS equivalent.
> >
> > Do you think it needs a CSS equivalent?
>
> No, but I also don't see why we should specify that there should not
> be a CSS equivalent, provided that the CSS WG can come up with a good
> reason why there needs to be one.
>

Agreed.


>
> --
> Ehsan
> <http://ehsanakhgari.org/>
>