This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
Specification: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/complete/introduction.html Section: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#typographic-conventions Comment: Typographic Conventions not implemented as portably as they could be Posted from: 2001:470:1f07:57:adbd:2da4:e64b:828a User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1) AppleWebKit/534.24 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/11.0.696.44 Safari/534.24
Created attachment 998 [details] ELinks' rendering (with document.colors.use_document_colors = 1)
Created attachment 999 [details] ELinks' rendering (with document.colors.use_document_colors = 0)
In particular, it would be better to at least not use the ":before" CSS pseudo-element: not only is this unlikely to be supported by terminal-based browsers (many of which don't seem to support CSS at all, though ELinks and Emacs/W3 support CSS but not ":before"), it also leads to undesirable copy/paste behavior. (In fact, this is how I noticed the use of ":before" in the first place: Chrome wasn't rendering "⚠" (U+26A0 WARNING SIGN) correctly, so I tried to paste it into PuTTY so I could ask unicode(1) about it on my Debian box; I ended up having to pull up the Developer Tools.) I've attached a screenshot of ELinks with document.colors.use_document_colors set to 1, meaning "foreground colors only", and one with it set to 0, meaning "no colors". (2, meaning "both foreground and background colors", was too horrible to show here; the background was a dismal gray, and none of the background colors used in this section of the spec was distinguishable from any of the others in nay case.) I think the default setting was 0, but it might have been 1. So, anyway, things like "Warning:" and "Note:" should be included in the HTML, and you should be careful not to depend on subtle color differences (or any background color) for important distinctions. (Thankfully, it's easy to tell the stuff that's supposed to be in boxes with distinct background colors apart anyway.) The most worrisome issue I'm seeing is that the examples are totally indistinguishable from normal paragraphs in ELinks.
mass-move component to LC1
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Did Not Understand Request Change Description: no spec change Rationale: The screenshots are pretty much what I intended, and much better than I feared. I don't object to having the preprocessor add the Warning: and Note: text if someone can do the code change. Please reopen the bug with the relevant patch if that's desired. You can catch me on IRC as Hixie if you need help writing the patch.