Re: [css3-writing-modes] before/after terminology alternative? from Glenn Adams on 2012-09-24 (public-i18n-cjk@w3.org from July to September 2012)

From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 09:11:57 +0800
To: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, MURAKAMI Shinyu <murakami@antenna.co.jp>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, "public-i18n-cjk@w3.org" <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CACQ=j+fVUgZfkgunf-F8JQ=bF=JiMsu9CEUx3SV_PYAsrN599w@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote:

>
> i'd like to hear what the I18N WG concludes on this matter before
> commenting further
>

I would suggest the CSS WG formally request review of the terminology
promulgated in [1] by the I18N Core WG for the purpose of determining
adherence to BCP and other I18N guidelines.

[1] http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-writing-modes/#abstract-box

Received on Monday, 24 September 2012 01:12:46 UTC