- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 11:32:10 -0800
- To: www-style@w3.org
- CC: www-international@w3.org, Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
Aryeh Gregor wrote:
>
> Also, pragmatically, it would be very cumbersome to add enumeration of
> all an alphabet's letters for every language people can think up.
> You'd have to have a different list-style-type for most languages --
> even Latin-based alphabets differ on what they think the exact set of
> letters is, and what their order is. It seems like this would greatly
> bloat the spec.
Yeah, I think if we're going down that route we should define keywords
for the most commonly-used alphabetic orders, and introduce a functional
notation for everything else. How often do we need, e.g. upper-norwegian,
given that lists are usually less than 26 letters?
alpha("a-z")
alpha("a-f,q-z")
alpha("do,re,mi,fa,so,la,ti")
Unicode can fill in ranges, so unless there are a lot of scripts like
Ethiopic, where every language seems to have picked its own order for
the letters, this doesn't have to be that painful.
~fantasai
Received on Friday, 13 February 2009 19:33:13 UTC