[whatwg] Proposal in supporting the writing of "Arabizi"
Ian Hickson
ian at hixie.ch
Tue May 8 14:38:50 PDT 2012
On Thu, 1 Dec 2011, Sami Eljabali wrote:
>
> There's a need for phonetic based keyboard support for Arabic speaking
> users on today's internet. There are two primary reasons for this:
>
> 1) Many Arabic speaking users don't surf in Arabic. A good portion of
> them are in non-arabic speaking countries, hence more often than not
> have non-arabic keyboards therefore finding it difficult to write Arabic
> on the internet. There are on the contrary, virtual Arabic keyboards on
> the OS level, as well as on sites like Google <http://www.google.ae/>
> addressing this, however phonetically spelling out a word, and seeing a
> list of words containing the one you were trying to spell out is
> dramatically more effective than the counterpart.
>
> 2) It vastly aids those with lacking a thorough Arabic education to
> properly to spell out what they phonetically know, hence allows a
> greater audience including non-natives to write in Arabic.
>
> *Proposal:*
>
> Have the interpreter described above be embedded within browsers and
> enabled when users click and focus on text fields defined as: <input
> type="text" lang="arabizi"> to interpret
> Arabizi<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_chat_alphabet>as Arabic.
> Should a browser not support it, then the <input type="text"> would be
> the fallback attribute leaving users writing in a plain text field.
As far as I can tell, nothing stops a Web browser or operating system from
implementing this kind of thing today. No need for the specification to
say anything special.
On Thu, 1 Dec 2011, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>
> We are looking into something like this for many languages. I've
> attempted to record this as a use-case on
> <http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Text_input_keyboard_mode_control>, but I
> can't figure out how to upload images yet. Once I do, I'll add
> screenshots, an explanation, and a link to this thread.
Supporting this kind of thing is definitely on the table, but as you hint
above, it needs more research first.
On Sun, 4 Dec 2011, Sami Eljabali wrote:
>
> I feel more thought could be put in swaying IME's off OSs, as it is
> limiting in availability for all.
I don't understand. Everybody has an operating system. Why would putting
things in the operating system limit availability? Operating systems and
their GUIs are responsible for almost everything that a browser does, at
one level or another.
On Sun, 4 Dec 2011, Sami Eljabali wrote:
>
> By not moving IME's off OSes, you're asking every OS connecting to the
> internet to support this feature. Netbooks for example, may just have a
> native web browser on it. Would its OS then need to implement its own
> IME for a few languages for their entry? Instead its web browser could
> just support the input field, given they can render them.
On Sun, 4 Dec 2011, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>
> Why would implementing IME for such an OS be harder than implementing
> one for the web browser?
Indeed. From the spec's point of view, they're more or less equivalent.
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg
mailing list