Thierry Koblentz writes:
Again, I don't think this is all about latin characters vs. arabic
characters.
It is. Latin characters are strong LTR, Arabic characters are strong RTL. A
string of Latin characters
Regardless of the script used, without "unicode-bidi", one does get
different results across browsers .
In my example, FF keeps all lists LTR while IE shows the second one RTL
and you you'll get different results again if you used Arabic characters in
the example. To create a test page in Latin script to test RTL properties is
problematic. For instance you need "unicode-bidi", which wouldn't be
necessary in a purely Arabic or Hebrew page.
Its necessary in your example in some browsers because you're mixing
embeding levels, placing a LTR embeding level within an RTL mebeding level,
and in the case of displaying a block element as an inline element within
those mixed embeding levels some browsers need some additional information.
If everything was just RTL that wouldn't be necessary.
In the CSS 2.1 documentation:
"For the 'direction' property to affect reordering in inline-level elements,
the 'unicode-bidi' property's value must be 'embed' or 'override'."
and the definition for the embeded value is:
"If the element is inline-level, this value opens an additional level of
embedding with respect to the bidirectional algorithm. The direction of this
embedding level is given by the 'direction' property. Inside the element,
reordering is done implicitly. This corresponds to adding a LRE (U+202A; for
'direction: ltr') or RLE (U+202B; for 'direction: rtl') at the start of the
element and a PDF (U+202C) at the end of the element."
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visuren.html#direction
In your example the doument and parent elemnet is RTL and you want each
list-item to display inline as RTL, so that the order of the inline elements
is form right to left. No problem if the text is Arabic, Hebrew or Syriac,
etc. But throw in strings of LTR text which creates another embedng level,
some browsers require the "unicode-bidi".
I created four test pages 2 with English text, 2 with Arabic text. One of
each pair had "unicode-bidi: embed;" while the other two documents did not
have this property set.
In Firefox, display between the two English pages differed. While display of
the two Arabic pages were the same.
I didn't test a mixed environment.
If you want to test a user interface for its behaviour in an RTL
environment, I'd suggest that the tests should be in a writing script that
is displayed RTL.
Andrew
Andrew Cunningham
Research and Development Coordinator
Vicnet
State Library of Victoria
Australia
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
