Re: dir=auto makes no sense for descendant user-visible attributes

That just makes sure that we have the problem that I brought up. To fix it,
one needs the opposite change, i.e. to say "the value of the dir attribute
of the element or its closest ancestor having an explicit or default dir
attribute value". But I fear that for most people this would be misleading,
since most people think, as you did, that the dir attribute inherits. They
would not know that the only element that has a default dir value is <bdi>.

So, once again, please consider using the definition with the dir=auto
exception. That is:

The attribsdir attribute determines the directionality in which the text of
the element's attributes must be displayed to the user. For
attribsdir="auto", the direction is computed independently for each
attribute. If attribsdir is not explicitly specified, the element's
attributes must be displayed in the direction specified by the value of the
dir attribute of the closest ancestor of the element (or the element
itself) having an explicit, valid dir attribute with a value other than
"auto". If there is no such element, the attributes must be displayed ltr.

Aharon

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Matitiahu Allouche <matial@il.ibm.com>wrote:

> I think it can fixed as follows.
> Instead of (old phrasing):
>    b. If the element has no attribsdir attribute,  the direction of
>    the text of visible attributes is the same as the value of the dir
>    attribute of the element or its closest ancestor having a dir
>    attribute (if the value is "auto", the direction is computed
>    independently for each visible attribute). If neither the element
>    nor any ancestor has a dir attribute, it is 'ltr'.
> Let's have (new phrasing):
>    b. If the element has no attribsdir attribute,  the direction of
>    the text of visible attributes is the same as the value of the explicit
> (not default) dir
>    attribute of the element or its closest ancestor having an explicit
> (not default) dir
>
>    attribute (if the value is "auto", the direction is computed
>    independently for each visible attribute). If neither the element
>    nor any ancestor has a dir attribute, it is 'ltr'.
>
> Shalom (Regards),  Mati
>       Bidi Architect
>       Globalization Center Of Competency - Bidirectional Scripts
>       IBM Israel
>       Mobile: +972 52 2554160
>
>
>
>
> From:        "Aharon (Vladimir) Lanin" <aharon@google.com>
> To:        Najib Tounsi <ntounsi@emi.ac.ma>
> Cc:        Matitiahu Allouche/Israel/IBM@IBMIL, "Martin J. Dürst" <
> duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan@mozilla.com>,
> public-i18n-bidi@w3.org
> Date:        28/02/2012 12:52
> Subject:        Re: dir=auto makes no sense for descendant user-visible
> attributes
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
> Oops, I just realized that there is a problem with the simplified
> formulation. The <bdi> element has dir=auto by default. Thus, the title in
> <html dir=rtl><bdi dir=auto title="C++"> will be displayed as "C++", but
> the title in <html dir=rtl><bdi title="C++"> will be displayed as "++C",
> even though <bdi> is supposed to be the same as <bdi dir=auto>.
>
> I am not sure how to fix this in the simplified formulation while keeping
> it simple.
>
> Please note that my formulation *with* the dir=auto exception does not
> suffer from this problem. And I am still convinced that it will usually
> give better results.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Aharon
>
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Najib Tounsi <*ntounsi@emi.ac.ma*<ntounsi@emi.ac.ma>>
> wrote:
> Aharon (Vladimir) Lanin wrote:
> Ok, so how about we propose it as you have phrased it, but afterwards also
> list a number of optional "bells and whistles" (input/textarea exception,
> dir=auto exception, the more complicated syntax). Let the editor reject
> them. He enjoys doing that anyway :-)
>
> Ehsan, Najib: is Mati's formulation acceptable to you?
>
> Yes! This proposal seems clear to me too. I support it. No more need of
> &#x202B; and &#x202C; :-)
>
>
> Aharon
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 27, *2012* <2012> at 3:50 PM, Matitiahu Allouche <*
> matial@il.ibm.com* <matial@il.ibm.com> <mailto:*matial@il.ibm.com*<matial@il.ibm.com>>>
> wrote:
>
>    Thanks to Aharon for improving the phrasing of my proposal. I now
>    phrase it as follows:
>
>    a. If the element has an attribsdir attribute, the value of this
>    attribute determines the direction of the text of each visible
>    attribute (for attribsdir="auto", the direction is computed
>    independently for each attribute).
>    b. If the element has no attribsdir attribute,  the direction of
>    the text of visible attributes is the same as the value of the dir
>    attribute of the element or its closest ancestor having a dir
>    attribute (if the value is "auto", the direction is computed
>    independently for each visible attribute). If neither the element
>    nor any ancestor has a dir attribute, it is 'ltr'.
>
>    I prefer this simpler specification even at the cost of what
>    Aharon calls a loss of usability. In fact, this loss of usability
>    is that with my spec it is necessary to specify a value for
>    attribsdir in cases when this would not be needed with Aharon's
>    specification. There is no case that can be handled with Aharon's
>    spec and cannot be handled with mine.
>    Simple wins, IMHO.
>
>    Aharon wrote: "I presume this means that you would be against
>    allowing attribsdir to take a more complicated (explicit) value
>    like "title:ltr;placeholder:rtl", correct?"
>    I think that this a nice syntactic format, but since it has not
>    found its place in HTML until now, and since it is possible to
>    express the same meaning with formats already existing in HTML, I
>    would rather not introduce it, to say nothing on the fact that its
>    chances to be accepted by the WHATWG seem very slim.
>
>
>    Shalom (Regards),  Mati
>          Bidi Architect
>          Globalization Center Of Competency - Bidirectional Scripts
>          IBM Israel
>          Mobile: *+972 52 2554160* <%2B972%2052%202554160><tel:%2B972%2052%202554160>
>
>
>
>
>
>    From:        "Aharon (Vladimir) Lanin" <*aharon@google.com*<aharon@google.com>
>    <mailto:*aharon@google.com* <aharon@google.com>>>
>
>    To:        Matitiahu Allouche/Israel/IBM@IBMIL
>    Cc:        Ehsan Akhgari <*ehsan@mozilla.com* <ehsan@mozilla.com>
>    <mailto:*ehsan@mozilla.com* <ehsan@mozilla.com>>>, Martin J. Dürst
>    <*duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp* <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <mailto:*
> duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp* <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>>>,
>    *public-i18n-bidi@w3.org* <public-i18n-bidi@w3.org> <mailto:*
> public-i18n-bidi@w3.org* <public-i18n-bidi@w3.org>>
>
>    Date:        27/02/2012 14:09
>    Subject:        Re: dir=auto makes no sense for descendant
>    user-visible attributes
>    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>    See below
>
>    On Sun, Feb 26, *2012* <2012> <tel:*2012* <2012>> at 5:13 PM,
> Matitiahu Allouche
>
>    <_matial@il.ibm.com_ <mailto:*matial@il.ibm.com* <matial@il.ibm.com>>>
> wrote:
>    I am afraid that I have no  silver bullet for this issue, and I
>    will go along with Aharon's proposal, but with some needed (IMHO)
>    simplification, because if it needs 9 examples to describe it
>
>    The examples are not there to describe it, and I was not trying to
>    give as few examples as possible. I give a definition, and it's
>    not complicated. But let me re-phrase the definition of the
>    default value of attribsdir even more simply:
>
>    - If the element is not <input> or <textarea>, and has a dir
>    attribute with a value other than auto, the same as its dir
>    attribute.
>    - Otherwise, if any ancestor of the element has a dir attribute
>    with a value other than auto, the same as the dir attribute of the
>    closest such ancestor
>    - Otherwise, 'ltr'.
>
>    , it is too complicated for my feeble mind.
>    So here is what I propose.
>    a. If attribsdir is not specified and the element has (explicitly
>    or by inheritance) a dir different from auto, its dir applies to
>    its visible attributes (no change from current spec).     b. If
> attribsdir is not specified and the element has dir=auto
>    (explicitly or by inheritance), dir=auto also applies
>    independently to each of the visible attributes.
>    c. If attribsdir is specified, it overrides the dir of the
>    element. If attribsdir=auto, the direction is computed
>    independently for each of the visible attributes.
>
>    I do not think that the definition can be phrased in terms of dir
>    inheritance because the dir attribute does not inherit. For
>    example, <span dir=ltr>&#x05D0;<span
>    dir=ltr>bc</span>&#x05D3;</span> is *not* the same as <span
>    dir=ltr>&#x05D0;<span>bc</span>&#x05D3;</span> (the first comes
>    out דbcא, while the second comes out אbcד).
>
>    Thus, I would phrase the definition you are proposing (for the
>    attribsdir default value) as:
>
>    - If the element has a dir attribute, the same as its dir attribute.
>    - Otherwise, if any ancestor of the element has a dir attribute,
>    the same as the dir attribute of the closest such ancestor.
>    - Otherwise, 'ltr'.
>
>    Or, perhaps more simply, as: The default value of attribsdir is
>    the same as the value of the dir attribute of the element or its
>    closest ancestor having a dir attribute. If neither the element
>    nor any ancestor has a dir attribute, it is 'ltr'.
>
>    There are two simplifications in this definition compared to mine:
>    - no exception for <input> and <textarea>
>    - no exception for dir=auto
>
>    I can live with either or both of these simplifications, even
>    though I think that usually the results would be better without
>    the simplifications. However, I would prefer to let the HTML5 spec
>    editor be the one to make simplifications that only make the
>    definition simpler, not more usable.
>
>    Unless I am wrong (it has happened in the past), this proposal
>    creates no backward compatibility problem,
>
>    Correct.
>         it is easy to understand and it allows any weird combination of
>    different directions for element data and attributes' text to be
>    solved by specifying attribsdir=auto and prefixing the attribute
>    value by &lrm; or &rlm; as needed.
>
>    True.
>
>    I presume this means that you would be against allowing attribsdir
>    to take a more complicated (explicit) value like
>    "title:ltr;placeholder:rtl", correct?
>
>
>    Shalom (Regards),  Mati
>          Bidi Architect
>          Globalization Center Of Competency - Bidirectional Scripts
>          IBM Israel
>          Mobile: _*+972 52 2554160* <%2B972%2052%202554160>_
> <tel:%2B972%2052%202554160>
>
>
>
>
>    From:        Ehsan Akhgari <_ehsan@mozilla.com_
>    <mailto:*ehsan@mozilla.com* <ehsan@mozilla.com>>>
>    To:        "Aharon (Vladimir) Lanin" <_aharon@google.com_
>    <mailto:*aharon@google.com* <aharon@google.com>>>
>    Cc:        _public-i18n-bidi@w3.org_
>    <mailto:*public-i18n-bidi@w3.org* <public-i18n-bidi@w3.org>>, Martin
> J. Dürst
>    <_duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp_ <mailto:*duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp*<duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
> >>
>
>    Date:        24/02/2012 19:30
>    Subject:        Re: dir=auto makes no sense for descendant
>    user-visible attributes
>    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>    I'm fine with attribsdir as you proposed, although I'm not quite
>    sure about the more complex syntax, since it's so different to the
>    way other attributes in HTML work.
>
>    Let's hear what others think.
>
>    Cheers,
>    --
>    Ehsan
>    <_*http://ehsanakhgari.org/_* <http://ehsanakhgari.org/_>>
>
>
>    On Thu, Feb 23, _*2012* <2012>_ <tel:*2012* <2012>> at 11:53 PM,
> Aharon (Vladimir)
>
>    Lanin <_aharon@google.com_ <mailto:*aharon@google.com*<aharon@google.com>>>
> wrote:
>    Good example.
>
>    In the past, Ian has already rejected titledir etc.
>
>    Perhaps they will be more receptive to attribsdir, since it's just
>    one attribute and tackles some serious problems.
>
>    Your example could be handled by also allowing syntax like
>    "title:rtl;placeholder:ltr". Even just " placeholder:ltr" could do
>    if the other attributes then follow the default (which in this
>    case would presumably be rtl despite dir=ltr on the <input>).
>    Since it does not inherit, there would not be too much difficulty
>    supporting the complex syntax.
>
>    But attribsdir would still be useful even if it only allowed a
>    simple value.
>
>    Aharon
>
>    On Feb 23, _*2012* <2012>_ <tel:*2012* <2012>> 6:11 PM, "Ehsan Akhgari"
>
>    <_ehsan@mozilla.com_ <mailto:*ehsan@mozilla.com* <ehsan@mozilla.com>>>
> wrote:
>    How about something like:
>
>    <input name="phone" title="TELEPHONE" placeholder="(123) 456-7890">
>
>    If we introduce an attribsdir attribute, I can see people asking
>    to differentiate between different attributes, such as the example
>    above.  From a bidi perspective, the ultimate solution is to have
>    a directional attribute for every user visible attribute, such as
>    titledir, placeholderdir, etc.  But honestly I don't expect such a
>    proposal to be easily accepted in WHATWG, given the recent
>    resistance towards placeholderdir.
>
>    --
>    Ehsan
>    <_*http://ehsanakhgari.org/_* <http://ehsanakhgari.org/_>>
>
>
>    On Thu, Feb 23, _*2012* <2012>_ <tel:*2012* <2012>> at 6:49 AM, Aharon
> (Vladimir)
>
>    Lanin <_aharon@google.com_ <mailto:*aharon@google.com*<aharon@google.com>>>
> wrote:
>    Well, I, for one, am not so happy with my proposal :-).
>
>    Its solution is to apply dir=auto to the individual user-visible
>    attributes, even though in most cases the values of such
>    attributes are not dynamic, but localized to the page locale, e.g.
>    (in an English page) <input dir="auto" name="purpose"
>    placeholder="The purpose of your visit.">. Using estimation for
>    them is not just wasteful, but bound to reach the wrong conclusion
>    occasionally.
>
>    And it does not address the long-standing issue of no way to set
>    the directionality of an attribute (other than using formatting
>    characters). The canonical examples are:
>
>    - <input dir="ltr" name="telephone" title="PHONE NUMBER.">, which
>    has to be worked around as <span title="PHONE NUMBER."><input
>    dir="ltr" name="telephone"></span>
>    - <input dir="ltr" name="telephone" placeholder="PHONE NUMBER.">,
>    which has no workaround other than RLE + PDF.
>
>    What if we could instead have a new attribute,
>    attribsdir="ltr|rtl|auto", which would determine the
>    directionality in which the element's user-visible attributes must
>    be displayed. A very important part of this would be the default
>    value. IMO, it would be best if it could default to the dir
>    attribute value of the closest ancestor - or the element itself
>    unless it is <input> or <textarea> - that has an explicit dir
>    attribute with a value other than "auto". If there is no such
>    ancestor, the default is "ltr". Thus:
>
>    - the only way to get attribsdir=auto is to specify it explicitly
>    - the explicit dir attribute value of <input> and <textarea>,
>    which is presumably meant to correspond to the directionality of
>    their content, not their user-visible attributes, does not affect
>    their default attribsdir.
>    - with the exceptions of <input dir="...">, <textarea dir="...">,
>    and <whatever dir=auto>, the result is backward-compatible.
>
>    Examples:
>
>    1. <html><body><div title="?">: ltr
>
>    2. <html dir=rtl><body><div title="?">: rtl
>
>    3. <html><body><div dir=rtl title="?">: rtl
>
>    4. <html><body><div><div dir=rtl><div><div title="?">: rtl
>
>    5. <html dir=rtl><body><div><input dir=ltr title="?"> : rtl
>
>    6. <html><body><div dir=rtl><div dir="auto" title="?">hello</div>:
>    rtl
>
>    7. <html><body><div dir=rtl><div dir="auto">ltr
>    content<div title="?">: rtl
>
>    8. <html dir=rtl><body><div title="?" attribsdir="ltr">: ltr
>
>    9. <html dir=rtl><body><div title="?" attribsdir="auto">: auto
>
>    Even if we couldn't get the <input> and <textarea> exception, we
>    would still be ok - the page would just have to
>    specify attribsdir explicitly on the problematic inputs.
>
>    Aharon
>
>    On Thu, Feb 23, _*2012* <2012>_ <tel:*2012* <2012>> at 11:32 AM,
> "Martin J. Dürst"
>
>    <_duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp_ <mailto:*duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp*<duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>>>
> wrote:
>    On 2012/02/23 1:11, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
>    On Wed, Feb 22, _*2012* <2012>_ <tel:*2012* <2012>> at 10:04 AM,
> Aharon (Vladimir)
>    Lanin<_aharon@google.com_ <mailto:*aharon@google.com*<aharon@google.com>
> >
>
>    wrote:
>
>    One possibility is to divorce user-visible attributes from their
>    elements'
>    directionality completely, always estimating the directionality of
>    each
>    attribute by its content. This suffers from backwards compatibility
>    problems (since estimation is a heuristic that sometimes gives the
>    wrong
>    answer).
>
>    A better possibility is to divorce it only for elements under the
>    influence of dir=auto. Thus, if an element has dir=auto (explicitly or
>    implicitly, the latter being the case for<bdi>), each of the
>    attributes in
>    the subrtree rooted at that element, with the exception of elements
>    specifying dir="ltr" or dir="rtl" and their descendants, must be
>    displayed
>    to the user as if they had a dir=auto of heir own.
>
>
>    I like the second proposal better.  Although I have to say that it
>    has been
>    worded a bit vaguely.  What I have in mind is for the title
>    attribute in
>    the following example to have a resolved RTL direction:
>
>    <p dir="auto" title="RTL TEXT followed by ltr text">ltr text
>    FOLLOWED BY
>    RTL TEXT</p>
>
>    I agree with Ehsan that the second proposal is better. It's
>    something that comes quite naturally once one gets used to it.
>
>    Regards,    Martin.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Najib TOUNSI (tounsi at *w3.org* <http://w3.org/>)
> W3C Office in Morocco (*http://www.w3c.org.ma/* <http://www.w3c.org.ma/>)
> Ecole Mohammadia d'Ingénieurs, BP. 765 Agdal-RABAT Morocco
> Mobile: *+212 (0) 661 22 00 30* <%2B212%20%280%29%20661%2022%2000%2030>
>
>
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 28 February 2012 12:47:01 UTC