[Bug 23260] Make the dir attribute use isolation instead of embedding

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 #24 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> ---
> > Note that the above specification
> 
> Not sure what you mean by "above specification"

http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-writing-modes


> "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.

That's non-normative (no MUST). And it doesn't use the HL* rules to define the
override formally as the bidi spec requests.


> [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."

That's non-normative (no MUST).


> "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."

That's non-normative (no MUST). Also it's vague — is "the bidi control codes
assigned to the end" defined anywhere? Does it handle nested elements? How
about bidi formatting codes that come from the block? (e.g. a block-level bdo)


> If you think that this is inadequate in some specific way, perhaps it should
> be brought up on the CSS list?

Filed bug 24006.


> > We are also relying on the 'content' property, which is currently basically
> > unspecified.
> 
> Indeed, this bothers me

We just need to spec the 'content' property. We're relying on it for more than
just bidi.


> 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.

I've added cross-references.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

Received on Thursday, 5 December 2013 18:32:05 UTC