- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:12:57 +0000 (UTC)
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009, Kristof Zelechovski wrote: > > All user agents should take the effective language into account for the > purpose of evaluating the average character width. This is not how the > browsers currently behave. However, since the rendering section is > non-normative, describing the right behavior does not break the Web. > It is irrelevant what all the browsers currently do, unless a vendor (or > anybody else) stands up and convinces us that this postulated behavior > is wrong or impractical. The goal of the rendering section is to describe what a browser should do to be compatible with what legacy content expects. > You take the equivalence between characters and glyphs for obvious and > granted because you are English; however, for a significant part of the > humanity this is simply untrue. Please reconsider. I do not believe that using the word "glyph" in this particular case would improve the readability of the spec. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 28 April 2009 13:12:57 UTC