- From: Matitiahu Allouche <matial@il.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 00:26:14 +0300
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-i18n-core@w3.org, WWW International <www-international@w3.org>, www-international-request@w3.org, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <OFF7B4DD2D.6F9002B6-ONC2257878.003D7F69-C2257878.0075D007@il.ibm.com>
Tab Atkins wrote: 5. I'm told there's a Hebrew alphabetic system: "This uses the Hebrew letters without final forms, i.e. U05D0-U05EA excluding U05DA, U05DD, U05DF, U05E3 and U05E5". I'd like some confirmation that this exists and is used, along with some confirmation of the given definition. and also 9. Apparently, at least some hebrew books number their pages with a simpler additive system which just uses the the characters associated with 1-9, 10-90, and 100-400, then just repeats TAV (the character for 400) repeatedly for larger numbers (so 1100 would be תתש, rather than א׳ק). Can I switch to *just* this system (allowing me to eliminate the special definition of Hebrew in favor of a simple @counter-style rule), or is there still a good case for the current definition? If I understand what Tab Atkins means, in the first case (paragraph 5), the number 10 will be expressed with the tenth letter of the alphabet and the number 11 will be expressed with the eleventh letter of the alphabet (without the final forms). In the second case (paragraph 9), the number 10 will be expressed with the tenth letter of the alphabet and the number 11 will be expressed with the tenth letter followed by the first letter. Both systems are legitimate, but the second one is more natural in modern usage. I see no problem using repeated TAV for numbers higher than 799. This should be understood by whoever understands the notation up to 799. And frankly, I don't see that lists longer than a few dozens of items are critical. Shalom (Regards), Mati Bidi Architect Globalization Center Of Competency - Bidirectional Scripts IBM Israel Fax: +972 2 5870333 Mobile: +972 52 2554160 From: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> To: www-style list <www-style@w3.org> Cc: WWW International <www-international@w3.org>, public-i18n-core@w3.org Date: 20/04/2011 03:01 Subject: [css3-lists] Remaining feedback on the module Sent by: www-international-request@w3.org [Cross-posting between www-style, www-international, and public-i18n-core. Please maintain all three of these lists in your replies so we don't split the thread unnecessarily.] When I started working on the CSS Lists Module <http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-lists>, Hixie sent me the collected feedback he'd received since 2002. I've now processed the majority of that feedback into spec edits, but I've got a couple of items still left, which I'll summarize in this email. If anyone has direct feedback on these items, or can hook me up with people who might have relevant feedback, please let me know! I plan to cut a new Working Draft of the module at the end of this month, so timely responses are appreciated. 1. I need to add some south asian systems. The W3C's Indian i18n group started responding about this a little while ago, but stopped responding to my requests for clarification. I need to restart talks with them. 2. Greek styles are incomplete. I've got a big chunk of greek feedback that I haven't properly processed yet. >_< 3. Are my current arabic/persian/urdu/etc systems sufficient, or are there differences that I'm not currently capturing? 4. Apparently Koranic verse has a particular numbering scheme different from general arabic/etc numbering. Can anyone confirm this and/or describe it for me? 5. I'm told there's a Hebrew alphabetic system: "This uses the Hebrew letters without final forms, i.e. U05D0-U05EA excluding U05DA, U05DD, U05DF, U05E3 and U05E5". I'd like some confirmation that this exists and is used, along with some confirmation of the given definition. 6. Should I add more european alphabetic styles, like a german one that includes umlauts? I've heard conflicting feedback (from Hakon, I believe) saying that I should instead drop the alternate european styles that currently exist, as list numbering is typically done using just the base english alphabet. 7. Are Aegean (U+10107-10133), Shavian (U+10450-1047F), and Ugaritic (U+10380-1039D) things I should address? I dunno if these are living or dead scripts. 8. Should I allow custom negative signs to be defined? Right now all the numeric styles just use hyphen-minus. Do any languages require a different negative sign? 9. Apparently, at least some hebrew books number their pages with a simpler additive system which just uses the the characters associated with 1-9, 10-90, and 100-400, then just repeats TAV (the character for 400) repeatedly for larger numbers (so 1100 would be תתש, rather than א׳ק). Can I switch to *just* this system (allowing me to eliminate the special definition of Hebrew in favor of a simple @counter-style rule), or is there still a good case for the current definition? ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 20 April 2011 21:30:14 UTC