- From: Allan Sandfeld Jensen <kde@carewolf.com>
- Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 13:15:14 +0200
- To: www-style@w3.org
On Thursday 16 June 2005 00:16, George Chavchanidze wrote: > AFAIK description of Georgian numbering given in CSS3 lists module is > wrong. > The right one is described in > http://people.netscape.com/ftang/paper/unicode16/part2.html > See also > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=287166 > http://my.opera.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=69401#post812726 > > But the actual problem is not whether it is right or wrong. > If browsers would implement this list-style-type property several > centuries ago, > then may be our ancestors would use it, but in modern Georgian this > numbering system > is not used at all. Therefore I think it is reasonable to replace ancient > Georgian numbering > systems with *much more useful* alphabetic system similar to lower-greek > and lower-latin. > Or even go further and define one alphabetic counter style and > list-style-type with optional > argument specifying Unicode range. In this case lower-roman will look > like > > alphabetic(a-z) or just alphabetic > > upper-roman will be > > alphabetic(A-Z) > > lower-greek will be > > alphabetic(\3B1-\3C9) > > upper-cyrillic > > alphabetic(\410-\42F) > > georgian will be > > alphabetic(\10D0-\10F0) > > etc. > > Much less head ache for implementators, users, linguists and ethnologists > and better functionality that covers many of CSS3 list styles. Not all alphabets can be covered by unicode ranges. In my previous suggestion I proposed a "list-style-alphabet: [string] list" property. This definition could cover everything from upper-greek, hiragana and katakana to upper- and lower-norwegian. Also I think the non-european decimal systems (such as arabic-indic and persian) would be a lot more usefull than ancient armenian and georgian. `Allan
Received on Saturday, 18 June 2005 11:15:22 UTC