Re: Closing issue [arabicnum-03]

Please refer to the following bug for this issue:

http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=181711

Rasha, I think you should argue your position in the above bug if you
feel strongly but Simon indicates in his latest comments that Gecko
should follow Section 13.3 of Unicode 3.0 as referred to by Martin.

- Kat

Martin Duerst wrote:

> Hello Rasha,
>
> Many thanks for your comments.
>
> At 14:09 03/05/06 +0300, Rasha Morgan wrote:
>
>> Hello Martin,
>> Regarding numeric shapes in the browser, they should follow the system
>> settings,
>
>
> I have a Japanese system, and don't remember having made such
> a system setting. And you seem to imply that if such a system
> setting is present, all the digits would appear as Arabic
> digits. Fortunately for me, that's not the case. Even on the page
> in question (http://www.w3.org/International/iri-edit/BidiExamples),
> only digits in vicinity of Arabic characters change shape.
> I'm not sure what the rule/algorithm is that Netscape uses for this.
> I don't like undefined (and therefore unpredictable and varying)
> behavior.
>
>
>> so if it is contextual or national they should appear in Arabic
>> digits. Otherwise they should appear in European digits.
>
>
> Who made up this rule? Unicode clearly states otherwise, as I already
> have explained (see below). And HTML and XML are based on Unicode.
>
>
>> So Netscape is working properly, please don't ask to disable this
>> feature.
>> also IE behaves the same way.
>
>
> In my case, IE doesn't, as I have explained before (see below).
>
>
>> Numeric shapes are part of the country culture and should not be
>> deprecated.
>
>
> I haven't said anything that would deprecate Arabic(-Indic) digits.
> Unicode has them, and anybody who wants to use them can use them.
> However, I wanted the digits in my page, which are European digits,
> to be displayed as European digits, and I think any browser (or other
> application, for that matter) that tries to change this behind my
> back is doing something wrong.
>
> Regards, Martin.
>
>
>
>> Have a nice day
>> Rasha Morgan
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> The Hardest victory is victory over self. Aristotle
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Advisory Globalization Specialist, team leader
>> IBM Egypt Branch,
>> Pyramids Heights,
>> Building No. 10
>> 22 Km. Cairo - Alex. Desert Road,
>> Guiza, Egypt.
>> Tel: SB: +202 5392539 ext 1409 DID: +202 536 1409
>> Fax. +20 2 539 2505
>>
>> E-mail : rasham@eg.ibm.com
>> VM : RASHAM at IBMEG
>> http://ctdc.cairo.ibm.com/CairoTDCWebsite/home.jsp
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Forwarded by Rasha Morgan/Egypt/IBM on 06/05/2003 01:18 $Bc
>> (B-----
>>
>> ----- Forwarded by Ahmed Talaat/Egypt/IBM on 04/05/2003 12:47 $Bc
>> (B-----
>>
>>
>> ---------------------- Forwarded by Matitiahu Allouche/Israel/IBM on
>> 04/05/2003 09:50 ---------------------------
>>
>>
>> Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>@w3.org on 02/05/2003 23:57:44
>>
>> Sent by: public-iri-request@w3.org
>>
>>
>> To: public-iri@w3.org
>> cc:
>>
>> Subject: Closing issue [arabicnum-03]
>>
>>
>> This serves to close
>> http://www.w3.org/International/iri-edit/#arabicnum-03.
>>
>> I had put this issue on the issues list because in examples
>> 7-9 of the BidiExamples page
>> (http://www.w3.org/International/iri-edit/BidiExamples),
>> I saw Arabic-Indic digits in the Arabic examples rather
>> than the European digits that I was expecting.
>>
>> Further examination has shown that this is a browser issue.
>> Netscape 7 (/Mozilla) is the only browser that I have found
>> that converts digit shapes when displaying them. Tango,
>> IE6, Safari, and Opera don't change digit shapes.
>>
>> Section 13.3 (http://www.unicode.org/book/ch13.pdf, p. 320)
>> of Unicode 3.0 is clear that nominal behavior (not changing
>> the glyphs used to display the digits) is correct, and
>> using national digit shaping would only be acceptable if
>> using the deprecated and strongly discouraged numeric
>> shape selectors (which I have of course not used).
>> So Netscape/Mozilla is wrong here, and should be fixed.
>> I have told somebody in the i18n team at Netscape.
>>
>> I have added a note at the top of the BidiExamples page
>> saying that a browser doing digit shaping correctly should
>> be used. I have closed this issue.
>>
>> Regards, Martin.
>
>
-- 
Katsuhiko Momoi <momoi@netscape.com>
Senior International Manager, Web Standards/Embedding
Netscape Technology Evangelism/Developer Support

Received on Tuesday, 6 May 2003 16:24:25 UTC