Re: f2f meeting day 1 notes: resolutions on sections 2.1, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4 of "Additional Requirements for Bidi in HTML"

We have decided that there is no need to specify the bidi behavior of
elements with display other than block, inline, inline-block, and runin,
since they are already sufficiently specified in
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visuren.html#direction

We have discussed but not reached a conclusion for the following suggestion:
When translating HTML to plain text, e.g. for copy/paste, the result should
contain the appropriate existing Unicode directional formatting codes so
that the text is displayed in the same visual order (by UBA-compliant
software) as the HTML, while retaining the text’s logical order. This should
be taken up in an e-mail thread.

Aharon


On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 8:11 AM, Aharon (Vladimir) Lanin
<aharon@google.com>wrote:

> A couple of things that I think need to be added to the list:
>
> - (Section 3.3) Elements with block display do *not* introduce a UBA
> paragraph break if they are floating or position:absolute.
> - (Section 2.1) When translating HTML to plain text (e.g. for copy/paste),
> ubi will affect the translation by sometimes adding LRM or RLM marks, using
> a specific algorithm.
>
> We need to discuss the ubi translation algorithm, but do not have time to
> do so at the meeting. Please let's do it by e-mail, probably on the list,
> and *soon*.
>
> Some points to ponder:
>
> - Do we need to specify the bidi behavior of elements with display other
> than block, inline, inline-block, and runin? For example, there are all the
> table-related display types ones.
>
> - We have a problem with <bdo dir="ltr|rtl" ubi>, since bdo needs to
> translate to unicode-bidi:override, but ubi needs to translate to
> unicode-bidi:isolate. We could resolve by adding an override-and-isolate
> value, I guess.
>
> Aharon
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Aharon (Vladimir) Lanin <aharon@google.com
> > wrote:
>
>>  Day 1 of the face-to-face meeting on Additional Requirements for Bidi in
>> HTML<http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2Fhtml-bidi%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNGy8aYw_oNMsDbjlyRq4WOIFu5BnA>(Adil Allawi, Aharon Lanin, Behdad
>> Esfahbod, Bob Jung, Craig Cummings, Ehsan Akhgari, Fantasai, Mark Davis,
>> Matitiahu Allouche, Najib Tounsi, Norbert Lindenberg, Roozbeh Pournader, Tab
>> Atkins, and Xiaomei Ji attending) has discussed the open issues on proposal
>> sections 2.1, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4. It has achieved consensus on the
>> following points, offering resolution to all current open issues in those
>> sections:
>>
>>    1. (Sections 2.1, 3.3) bdi has an effect on all and only elements that
>>    are rendered as CSS non-replaced inline boxes, e.g.:
>>       1. will be ignored by all elements that are not display:inline (or
>>       display:runin when it behaves as display:inline).
>>       2. display:inline-block should continue to use isolation, as stated
>>       in the spec, and should ignore bdi.
>>       3. bdi will be ignored by floating and position:absolute (and
>>       fixed) elements.
>>       4. block elements with display:inline will be subject to bdi, and
>>       will have it on by default.
>>    2. (Section 2.1) bdi will do isolation (not separation).
>>    3. (Section 2.1) CSS equivalent of bdi is unicode-bidi:isolate. Thus,
>>    it does not inherit (neither in CSS nor in HTML).
>>    4. (Section 2.1) Rename bdi to ubi (Unicode Bidi Isolate).
>>    5. (Section 2.1) ubi syntax is ubi=”ubi”|””|”off”. The “ubi” and empty
>>    string values are equivalent (and specify isolation).
>>    6. (Section 2.1, 2.2, 3.1) The default value for ubi is “off”, except
>>    when dir=auto and for block elements with display:inline. It will not be on
>>    by default for <a> or <br> or display:inline-block.
>>    7. (Section 2.1) Add a best practice for authors to use bdi on <a>,
>>    once at least one browser implements ubi.
>>    8. (Section 3.1) Add a new HTML attribute that affects the behavior of
>>    all descendant <br> elements.
>>       1. Tentative syntax for the attribute: bidi-break=”soft”|”hard”.
>>       The “soft” value means to treat the <br> as the UBA bidi class WS. The
>>       “hard” value means to treat it as B.
>>       2. The default value is “hard”.
>>       3. Thus, to get behavior like U+2028 in mark-up, use <br
>>       bidi-break=soft>. It could also be specified on an ancestor, e.g. for
>>       poetry.
>>       4. The CSS equivalent is a new property,
>>       unicode-bidi-break:hard|soft.
>>    9. (Section 3.2) All non-collapsed newlines, e.g. in <pre> and
>>    <textarea>, are treated as UBA paragraph breaks.
>>    10. (New section) HTML5 and CSS2.1 should clarify that U+2028 and
>>    U+2029 in <pre> and <textarea> should behave as they do in plain text.
>>    11. (Section 3.4) Approach ECMAScript people about giving optional
>>    explicit direction parameters to alert(), confirm(), and prompt().
>>    12. (Section 3.4) In the absence of direction passed in via an
>>    explicit parameter, dialog text should be broken up into paragraphs, and the
>>    direction of each paragraph be automatically detected and applied in the
>>    paragraph’s display.
>>    13. (New section) User agents must implement the Unicode spec re
>>    Default Ignorable Code Points (Unicode Standard version 5.2, Chapter 5<http://unicode.org/versions/Unicode5.2.0/ch05.pdf>,
>>    section 5.21), including never displaying the LRM, RLM, LRE, RLE, LRO, RLO,
>>    and PDF characters inappropriately (e.g. as empty boxes or advance widths)
>>    even if the underlying platform does not handle them properly. In
>>    particular, this must be the case for script dialog text, page titles, and
>>    tooltips.
>>
>> Aharon
>>
>
>