- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 13:55:00 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 04/20/2011 11:37 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 9:26 PM, Koji Ishii<kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp> wrote: >> Thank you for updating the ED, Tab. Here're some feedbacks from me. >> >> ** 4.3.4. The Japanese "spoken-out" counter styles >> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-lists/#japanese-counter-styles >> >> * Digit 0 is U+3007, not U+96F6 for both "japanese-informal" and "japanese-financial". > > I've had specific feedback from another Japanese speaker (from my > team) that U+96F6 is more appropriate for both of those. I'll just > mark it as an issue for now. > > >> ** 13. Appendix A: Required Predefined Counter Styles >> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-lists/#ua-stylesheet >> >> * The "suffix" property for "cjk-decimal" and "fullwidth-decimal" is U+3001. Japanese uses U+3001 or U+FF0E, and Chinese uses U+3001, U+FF0C, or U+FF0E (if I understand correctly), so the choices are U+3001 or U+FF0E. I would prefer U+3001. I don't know which Chinese people prefers though. > > I'll change it to U+3001 for now. > > >> * Are we dropping "cjk-ideographic" which was in CSS 2.0? It would be ideal if the value can map to "*-informal" depending on language tag. > > Yes; the only purpose of that type seemed to be to host the cjk > algorithm. Since the three languages all actually have slightly > *different* algorithms, it didn't make sense to keep it. You need to define it and map it to *something*. Features in CSS2.0 that were dropped in 2.1 are supposed to be defined in CSS3. You can probably alias it to trad-chinese-informal or trad-japanese-informal, which should be consistent with the other CJK numbering systems for any list numbers below 100. I'm having a little trouble loading the algorithms into my brain atm, but is the difference that Chinese says "一百" and Japanese says "百" for 100? ~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 20 April 2011 20:55:31 UTC