- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2013 20:06:58 +0000
- To: public-i18n-bidi@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23260
Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #21 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> ---
(In reply to Aharon Lanin from comment #20)
> 1. There is a problem in the CSS. The selector of "bdo { unicode-bidi:
> isolate-override; }" has a lower specificity than the selectors of "[dir=ltr
> i], [dir=rtl i], [dir=auto i] { unicode-bidi: isolate; }".
Oops, fixed.
> But actually, I think it would
> be best to remove any reference to implementation via Unicode formatting
> characters entirely, because this is actually in the province of
> http://www.w3.org/TR/css-writing-modes-3.
Unfortunately CSS is optional so we can't rely on it being present.
But I suppose we could just require that UAs act as if it was present. Done.
This supersedes your other comments in point 2 and your points 3 and 4.
Note that the above specification doesn't seem to actually define any of this
in sufficient detail. The bidi spec lists the precise ways in which it can be
overridden by a higher-level spec (the HL* rules), but I don't see anything in
the Writing Modes spec that actually does this adequately. So right now, this
is still far too vaguely defined to get interop. (We are also relying on the
'content' property, which is currently basically unspecified.)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Monday, 2 December 2013 20:07:00 UTC