- From: Yves Savourel <yves@opentag.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 05:16:38 -0700
- To: "'Tex Texin'" <tex@yahoo-inc.com>, "'Felix Sasaki'" <fsasaki@w3.org>, "'WWW International'" <www-international@w3.org>
Hi Tex, > For starters, we are long overdue to get rid of the idea > we need markup for bidi control when unicode controls can > do the same thing, and work in contexts where bidi > markup cannot go. > When editors did not support bidi, it made sense to make > it visible and the results would be seen in a browser. > As editors today support bidi, it makes little sense to > not be WYSIWYG, and see the results as you edit, as opposed > to inserting bidi markup and having to switch feom edit to > browser and back to understand how the text is impacted. > The joint Unicode-W3C standard should be revised to reflect > a more sensible practice. Thanks for the feedback. I'm also not so sure about bidi support in editors: the use of XML goes way outside the world of browsers, and there are many cases where the documents are edited with tools not supporting bidi. In anycase, the document merely follow the same line as other (relatively recent) W3C and Unicode documents (for example http://www.w3.org/TR/unicode-xml/#Bidi). If this needs to be changed, then as you said, it needs to be updated everywhere. Cheers, -yves
Received on Thursday, 14 February 2008 17:47:09 UTC