[predefined-counter-styles] ‘fullwidth-’, ‘circled-’ and similar styles

Previous Topic Next Topic
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view

[predefined-counter-styles] ‘fullwidth-’, ‘circled-’ and similar styles

r12a via GitHub
Crissov has just created a new issue for

== ‘fullwidth-’, ‘circled-’ and similar styles ==
- [European Digits &

The simple styles that use roman letters or international digits
inside an em-square have `fullwidth` in their name.

* `fullwidth-lower-alpha`
* `fullwidth-upper-alpha`
* `fullwidth-decimal`
* `fullwidth-lower-roman`
* `fullwidth-upper-roman`

Counter styles with precomposed circles, parentheses or dots without
using `suffix:` do not have the `fullwidth-` prefix.

* `circled-decimal`
* `circled-lower-latin`
* `circled-upper-latin`
* `dotted-decimal`
* `double-circled-decimal`
* `filled-circled-decimal`
* `parenthesized-decimal`

As far as I know, Unicode inherited theses characters from legacy East
 Asian character sets/encodings primarily for round-trip compatibility
 with existing content. For authors who are not familiar with the
history of character encodings, `fullwidth` is completely opaque and
meaningless. That’s most of them, at least outside China, Japan and
Korea. Yet, Europeans, Africans or Americans used only to the roman
script might still feel tempted to use these counter styles.

1. Should they be specified at all?
2. Should we find a better prefix (or reuse `cjk-`) and apply it
3. Should they be in a common section?
    - … a new, separate one?
    - … part of [Han Ideographic

I believe the circled ones are okay, the rest should not be used, at
least not in Western texts.

See https://github.com/w3c/predefined-counter-styles/issues/6
Please do NOT reply to this email. If you'd like to contribute to the
discussion, please do so at the above link. You will need to subscribe
 yourself to the issue (using the button provided by that page) to
receive notifications of further comments.