- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2013 12:28:47 +0000
- To: public-i18n-bidi@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23260 Aharon Lanin <aharon.lists.lanin@gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|FIXED |--- --- Comment #23 from Aharon Lanin <aharon.lists.lanin@gmail.com> --- > fixed the CSS rules for <bdo>. Thanks, looks good. > Note that the above specification Not sure what you mean by "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. Here is some of the relevant text from Writing Modes: "User agents that support bidirectional text must apply the Unicode bidirectional algorithm to every sequence of inline-level boxes uninterrupted by any block boundary or “bidi type B” forced paragraph break. This sequence forms the paragraph unit in the bidirectional algorithm." "In general, the paragraph embedding level is set according to the direction property of the paragraph’s containing block rather than by the heuristic given in steps P2 and P3 of the Unicode algorithm. [UAX9] When the computed unicode-bidi of the paragraph’s containing block is plaintext, however, the Unicode heuristics (rules P2 and P3) are used instead." "If an inline element is broken around a bidi paragraph boundary (e.g. if split by a block or forced paragraph break), then the bidi control codes assigned to the end of the element are added before the interruption and the codes assigned to the start of the element are added after it. (In other words, any embedding levels or overrides started by the element are closed at the paragraph break and reopened on the other side of it.)" If you think that this is inadequate in some specific way, perhaps it should be brought up on the CSS list? > We are also relying on the 'content' property, which is currently basically > unspecified. Indeed, this bothers me, and I am not sure that it is a good idea to remove the specific bidi requirements from the description of <br> and <wbr>. Furthermore, the CSS for <br> and <wbr> is in http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#phrasing-content-1, and not in http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#bidirectional-text, so it is not at all obvious that there is anything bidi-significant there. Perhaps a note should be added to http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#bidirectional-text saying that http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#phrasing-content-1 also contains some rules relevant to bidirectional reordering, in that the content specified for <br> and <wbr> determines their bidirectional properties. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 3 December 2013 12:28:50 UTC