Re: Notifications and BIDI

(Cc+ public-i18n-bidi)

(12/06/07 16:08), Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> Sorry to bother you again. By studying the text in HTML I have tried
> to define something reasonable for BIDI in
> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/notifications/raw-file/tip/Overview.html#rendering
> but it feels somewhat shaky. If you could take another look and
> provide some guidance that would be appreciated.

Some feedback:

1. The prose is logically correct but it specifically talks about the
details of P2 for the directionality (by the way, I think the exact term
is "base direction" or "paragraph direction") of the title *only* but
not for the body, which seems a bit weird.

I think Aharon's wording

(12/05/01 17:22), Aharon (Vladimir) Lanin wrote:
> "If the notification's dir attribute is auto, its title and body must
> be split into paragraphs and the directionality of each paragraph
> determined from its content independently of the others as specified
> by the Unicode bidirectional algorithm's rule P1, P2, and P3."

has the extra benefit that it doesn't use the hidden assumption that a
UA only shows a single paragraph of the title of a notification.

2. The prose

  # The higher-level override of rules P2 and P3 is provided by a
  # notification's body direction, when that is not "auto".

can be clarified to

  | The higher-level override of rules P2 and P3 is provided by a
  | notification's body direction, when that is not "auto", so that the
  | base direction of each paragraph is the notification's body
  | direction.

to prevent the misinterpretation that the body direction only applies to
the first paragraph. (But admittedly this misinterpretation is a bit
hypothetical. For reference, css3-writing-modes uses

[[
  (definition of a paragraph)

  The paragraph embedding level is set according to the value of the
‘direction’ property of the paragraph's element rather than by the
  heuristic given in steps P2 and P3 of the Unicode algorithm.
]]

)

3. The sentence "including, for instance, supporting the
paragraph-breaking behaviour of U+000A LINE FEED (LF) characters" calls
out LF but not other characters such as U+2029 PARAGRAPH SEPARATOR.

This is a minor thing though, and I notice that this sentence comes from
the HTML spec.


Cheers,
Kenny

Received on Thursday, 7 June 2012 10:18:28 UTC