W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 2012

Re: Proposal for isolation characters in Unicode and the unicode-bidi:isolate and unicode-bidi:plaintext definitions

From: Aharon (Vladimir) Lanin <aharon@google.com>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 17:02:02 +0200
Message-ID: <CA+FsOYYTxZU_w+9W+r3s+Y51ba=CtVaJ5sKRnAYzPhWjCPfO7w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Asmus Freytag <asmusf@ix.netcom.com>
Cc: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, public-i18n-bidi@w3.org, W3C style mailing list <www-style@w3.org>
Please note that the last three messages in the thread below have gone only
to public-i18n-bidi, and not to www-style. That is because I took www-style
off an earlier message that was discussing issues in the Unicode proposal
itself, which I believe was not relevant to the CSS list. On the other
hand, these three messages do seem relevant to www-style, so I am reposting.


On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:05 PM, Asmus Freytag <asmusf@ix.netcom.com>wrote:

> On 5/15/2012 1:55 PM, fantasai wrote:
>> On 05/15/2012 01:30 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
>>> I agree. I raised this issue last week in Hanover at the CSS WG meeting,
>>> to which fantasai replied that there was a plan to
>>> modify Unicode to maintain harmony. However, it would seem that may not
>>> be the case.
>> To be clear, you asked me why CSS3 had isolation at all when Unicode did
>> not, not
>> whether it's behavior in the edge cases Aharon just brought forward
>> yesterday is
>> identical to that defined in the new proposals for Unicode.
>> ~fantasai
>>  OK, let's not deep-end here on the details of past conversations.
> The important thing is that if both Unicode and CSS add "isolate" that
> the two groups please make sure that those specifications are compatible.
> Approving two identically named features with different behavior is
> very problematic.
> A./
Received on Wednesday, 16 May 2012 15:03:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:16 UTC