Re: Multiple Directions (was: Re: Coptic/Greek (Re: Phoenician))

From: Ernest Cline (
Date: Mon May 17 2004 - 12:00:45 CDT

  • Next message: fantasai: "Re: Multiple Directions"

    John Cowan wrote:
    > Andrew C. West scripsit:
    > > Thus, if "tb-lr" were supported, your browser would display the
    > > following HTML line as vertical Mongolian with embedded Ogham
    > > reading top-to-bottom, but in a plain text editor, the Mongolian and
    > > Ogham
    > > would both read LTR, and everyone would be happy :
    > I don't know about that. I wouldn't be too happy trying to read English
    > with the Latin letters laid out bt-rl and lying on their left sides to
    > On paper is one thing, but on a non-rotatable screen? I don't think so.

    Which may well be why CSS doesn't have "bt-rl" (It was in an early
    draft, but the actual recommendation does not support "bt-lr" or "bt-rl".)
    The lack of actual scripts that have a bottom to top block progression
    (as CSS would describe it) probably also played a part.

    Still, this whole question of what to do with the glyphs when a text is
    written in an unusual orientation is something that must be answered.
    Whether the answer should be given by Unicode is a related but
    separate question. CSS glyph orientation [1] is an attempt at an
    answer, but whether it is sufficient I can't say as I haven't dealt with it
    in any detail myself.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon May 17 2004 - 12:02:33 CDT