25653 2014-05-10 14:00:18 +0000 After reading the Authoring Conformance Criteria for bidirectional-algorithm formatting characters, [...] 2014-07-29 21:44:28 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified WHATWG HTML unspecified Other other RESOLVED NEEDSINFO http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#user-agent-conformance-criteria P3 normal Unsorted 1 contributor ian ian mike contributor oldest_to_newest 105623 0 contributor 2014-05-10 14:00:18 +0000 Specification: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/elements.html Multipage: http://www.whatwg.org/C#user-agent-conformance-criteria Complete: http://www.whatwg.org/c#user-agent-conformance-criteria Referrer: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/ Comment: After reading the Authoring Conformance Criteria for bidirectional-algorithm formatting characters, I was expecting there to be explicit guidance for how user-agents should handle documents that do not meet the authoring conformance criteria. I assume user agents should quietly insert enough POP DIRECTIONAL FORMATTING characters to reset whatever bidi formatting characters are present, but it would be nice to have that spelled out. Posted from: 202.7.241.231 User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:30.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/30.0 Iceweasel/30.0a2 105626 1 ian 2014-05-10 15:47:28 +0000 It's in the CSS spec. The section "Requirements relating to the bidirectional algorithm", subsection "User agent conformance criteria", says that the CSS rules regarding bidi are normative, even on UAs that don't support CSS per se. 109531 2 ian 2014-07-29 21:44:28 +0000 I'm not sure how to improve this. The two sections are right next to each other.