W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > January to March 2014

Re: [counter-styles] i18n-ISSUE-285: Hebrew number converter inadequate for numbers >= 1000

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 15:10:58 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDA3+X4uremOAxtOfWECJuH86SAFbWgz=z8i6bUW6nraWQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
Cc: Aryeh Gregor <ayg@aryeh.name>, W3C Style <www-style@w3.org>, www International <www-international@w3.org>
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org> wrote:
> I was making the necessary changes to my tests and the Predefined Counter
> Styles WD when it occurred to me that we are making a mistake here to make
> the 'longer-hebrew' style described below an alternative.
> Firefox, Chrome, Safari and Opera all implement hebrew numbering already per
> the longer-hebrew style.  IE and old-Opera don't implement hebrew numbering
> at all.
> Run the test here:
> http://www.w3.org/International/tests/repository/run?manifest=predefined-counter-styles&test=list-style-type-116a
> See the results here:
> http://www.w3.org/International/tests/repository/predefined-counter-styles/results/results-predefined-counter-styles#hebrew
> So why not make the definition of hebrew in the spec be the definition
> provided for longer-hebrew below, and possibly keep the other hanging around
> as the alternative?
> If we don't, I doubt that hebrew will get through CR. If we do, it will sail
> through, and if people really want the verbose version that only goes up to
> 2000, they can use a definition in the Predefined Counter Styles doc (though
> I'm not sure what I'd call it).

The implementation information is convincing.  I've switched the
spec's definition of "hebrew" over to the longer form, and updated DoC
issue #1 from Rejected to Accepted.

Received on Monday, 10 February 2014 23:11:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:41:04 UTC