- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 21:04:04 +0200
- To: "Rotan Hanrahan" <Rotan.Hanrahan@MobileAware.com>
- Cc: www-international@w3.org, www-di@w3.org, bidi@unicode.org
On Thursday, September 22, 2005, 12:39:02 PM, Rotan wrote: RH> Thanks to everyone who has replied to the DIWG request for RH> information on Web page layouts in different cultures. I strongly recommend taking a look at the XSL specification were many of the questions you pose are already addressed and in some cases well explained and illustrated. RH> There appears to be a general feeling that the main layouts are OK, RH> accepting that mirror images will be used in situations where the reading direction is different. RH> The issue for DIWG is to represent (broadly) the layout of a page, RH> and subsequently to adapt this layout to fit different devices, RH> especially small mobile devices. It is possible that such RH> re-organisation of layouts could be achieved via an enhancement to RH> CSS, which DIWG will be giving some thought to over the coming months. RH> Meanwhile, there appears to be an opinion that within the broad RH> components of a Web page layout one encounters more subtle issues RH> relating to the way that text is represented. Here are some RH> questions that are layout-related, but are influenced by text representation: RH> * Western text (e.g. english) uses bullet lists that have the RH> bullets on the left, the text running horizontally and the list RH> growing downward (vertically). What is the case for languages that RH> write text vertically? Or Right-to-Left (RTL)? RH> * Western text requires several characters per word. So the RH> information is dense vertically, but not so dense horizontally. What RH> is the information density for other languages? Idiographics etc? RH> For example, in english, the phrase "Home Page" fits into a few RH> pixels high, and many more pixels wide, but how does the sample phrase in Chinese compare? It would need more pixels in height to display a single character but the whole phrase would be far fewer characters. RH> * Are there any special considerations for word-wrapping of vertical text? RH> * Are there special text layout considerations for ruby annotations? RH> * Western text often uses coloured underlining to indicate a RH> hyperlink. What is the norm for languages where such lines might not RH> be easy to notice? Are there such languages? RH> * If users could choose, would they prefer portrait or landscape RH> layouts? How would the rules of their written text influence their preference? RH> These are just some of the kinds of issues that DIWG participants RH> are considering while we work on the layout concepts. These issues RH> may or may not have an impact on the general layout technology we RH> eventually propose. Nevertheless, we want to be sure that we have as RH> much information as possible while we do this work. RH> Thank you for your input to date. RH> ---Rotan. RH> ____________________________ RH> Dr Rotan Hanrahan RH> Chief Innovations Architect RH> Mobileaware Ltd RH> RH> 3094 Lake Drive RH> Citywest RH> Dublin 24, Ireland RH> E: rotan.hanrahan@mobileaware.com RH> W: www.MobileAware.com -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Chair, W3C SVG Working Group W3C Graphics Activity Lead Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
Received on Thursday, 22 September 2005 19:04:25 UTC