- From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
- Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2009 13:16:38 +0200
- To: "Phillips, Addison" <addison@amazon.com>
- Cc: Marcos Caceres <marcosc@opera.com>, "ishida@w3.org" <ishida@w3.org>, "public-Webapps@w3.org" <public-Webapps@w3.org>, "public-i18n-core@w3.org" <public-i18n-core@w3.org>
Hi Addison, On Jul 10, 2009, at 21:18 , Phillips, Addison wrote: > Saying "we're concerned no one will implement ITS" makes it sound > like some exotic specification that may not find community support. > But plenty of Recs have 'dir' and 'span' attributes/elements to > allow for proper bidi markup. Having ITS define these for you in a > conveniently referenced spec is a novelty, but shouldn't be used as > a reason for "people" to think they "don't need to implement it" :-). > > I believe that most widget engines can easily implement these > features because they already leverage the text layout capabilities > of a browser, of the host operating system, or both and because most > JavaScript engines already implement Unicode bidi. Setting base > direction or directional override from markup is a small matter of > implementing the parsing---not a total rewrite. If you specify it, I > believe it can happen. This opinion is shared by a large plurality on the WG, but as you know, at the end of the day, if implementers don't implement it there isn't much we can do. We marked it as at risk precisely because at least one implementer said they might not do it — this is a process protection that would allow us to drop the feature at the end of CR and not have to go back to LC. I encourage you to apply your talents of persuasion on the implementers themselves, as that is what will make a difference regarding the use of ITS in W:PC! -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ Feel like hiring me? Go to http://robineko.com/
Received on Saturday, 11 July 2009 11:17:11 UTC