Re: [css3-writing-modes] i18n-ISSUE-167: Example of Bidirectional Text

Just looked at the latest CR draft 
http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/CR-css-writing-modes-3-20140320/

I think that the CSS in example 2:

/* Rules for bidi */
[dir=ltr] {direction: rtl;}
[dir=rtl] {direction: ltr;}
quote     {unicode-bidi: isolate;}


should probably now be:

/* Rules for bidi */
[dir=ltr] {direction: rtl; unicode-bidi: isolate; }
[dir=rtl] {direction: ltr; unicode-bidi: isolate; }


This concords with the advice we give authors in 
http://www.w3.org/International/articles/inline-bidi-markup/ and with 
the shift to dir being always isolating, and it also makes the extra 
line for quote unnecessary.

RI



On 26/11/2012 21:35, fantasai wrote:
> On 10/17/2012 10:01 AM, Richard Ishida wrote:
>> Example of Bidirectional Text
>> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-writing-modes/#bidi-example
>>
>> I've been meaning to say for some years now that this is a very bad
>> example. It should use dedicated bidi specific markup (see
>> http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-bidi-css-markup#markup
>> "You should therefore use dedicated bidi markup whenever
>> it is available. Do not simply attach CSS styling to a general element
>> to achieve the effect."). Here is an proposal for an
>> alternative version of parts of the example.
>
> I switched the example to use DocBook. Take a look and let me know if
> it's good?
>
>> /* Rules for bidi */
>> *[dir=rtl] {direction: rtl; unicode-bidi: embed;}
>> *[dir=ltr] {direction: ltr; unicode-bidi: embed;}
>>
>> These generic style rules should be what goes in the separate style
>> sheet.
>
> Not sure I handled this part as you want; I think you want me to adjust
> the prose somehow?
>
>> Also, we recommend not using bidi markup unless you need to change the
>> base direction, so if this document had an overall base
>> direction of ltr (either by default, or via <ROOT dir="ltr">), you
>> wouldn't need to have the dir="ltr" after ENGLISH. It may
>> be worth adding a note to that effect.
>
> I think it's not that important to point out here.
>
>> It's also confusing that the markup is in uppercase, since the
>> uppercase is used to indicate Hebrew characters. Unless you are
>> trying to make a point that the markup uses hebrew element names
>> (which I don't think is necessary here), they should probably
>> be in lowercase.
>
> Good point. Fixed.
>
> ~fantasai
>

Received on Monday, 24 March 2014 16:11:50 UTC