- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 01:54:44 +0000
- To: public-i18n-bidi@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19505
Martin Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp
--- Comment #6 from Martin Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> As for what spec to put that in... I'd suggest a combination of Encoding and
> HTML, e.g. Encoding for rule #1, and HTML for rule #2. This is very specific
> to iso-8859-8.
The best thing would be if all of this were in HTML, as a (piece of a) default
style sheet. To get around the fact, as Fantasai's example shows, that dir
attribute values are ignored, one could use !important in the default style
sheet.
This wouldn't be absolutely perfect, but I doubt there are people who use
visual Hebrew and stylesheets where they tweak bidi rendering properties, even
more !important. It would give (future) implementers a hopefully easy way to
cover this. They wouldn't need special rendering logic, just a switch to change
the default style sheet.
The more basic question is how many iso-8859-8 pages are still around, overall.
Does anybody have any numbers? Mark Davis should have them as part of his
"UTF-8 reached more than 50% of the Web" survey.
[One set of data I found was
http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/en-iso885908/all/all. That shows
iso-8859-8 at between 0.002% and 0.001% (which would be between 0.00002 and
0.00001, i.e. about every Web page in 50,000 or 100,000 is in iso-8859-8).
However, http://w3techs.com/technologies/overview/character_encoding/all
doesn't list iso-8859-8-i at all, so I don't trust this data. And none of the
top pages of the sites listed uses iso-8859-8.]
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 27 November 2012 01:54:45 UTC