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.
Aharon
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./
>
>
>