Extension talk:TranslateSvg/2.0

1st!
This looks great. Looking forward to the first codings! --83.83.166.220 07:49, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Preliminary RTL remarks
Looks good in general. Some general ideas about RTL:

My wild guess is that for most images the general orientation will remain and only the directionality of each string should be set. I don't really know SVG, so i won't embarrass myself by writing bad SVG, but i'll write it as if it was HTML:

And in Hebrew:

Note:
 * 1) I didn't change the dir of the root html element. This should be the default, but there can be an option to change it.
 * 2) I applied dir="rtl" to every changed element. Applying dir="rtl" probably makes this unnecessary, but it should be optional (see the previous point).
 * 3) I changed the lang attribute of the root element. AFAIK this attribute is applicable to SVG, and it must be used whenever possible. Applying it once to the root element should be enough. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 11:19, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey Amir. The framework being used here in fact does limit us rather to only change things on a per-string basis (example with code). Thus, your post is indeed pertinent :) One issue though: because of that, you can't use "lang" globally (since global components such as shapes are not language specific), but only on a per-string basis. Then again, I'm not entirely sure that defining on a per-string basis is in fact desirable, because SVG allows you to optimise by having multiple languages display the same string (for example, many languages would be happy to leave untranslated the number "63"), a feature that would have to be abandoned in order to allow xml:lang to be implemented. Perhaps I've merely underestimated the importance of implementing xml:lang where systemLanguage (the attribute used to switch the display depending on language) already says (in semantic terms) "the following should be displayed to French-, German-, Spanish- and Norwegian-language readers", however? Hope that's not too unclear - the link should help if so. Thanks! Jarry1250 (talk) 14:16, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, that's probably where my SVG ignorance kicks in :)
 * Basically what i'm saying is that explicitly specifying a language of any string is VERY useful. W3C expresses the importance of this quite well in its standards documents. It's useful for applying correct font, font size, hyphenation, spell-checking, line spacing, machine translation and many other things. In HTML documents it's already used quite widely, and should be used in SVG documents for the same reasons. How exactly should it be applied and on which elements - that's something that a person knowledgeable in SVG should decide.
 * Unfortunately, W3C standards explicitly say that directionality should NOT be deduced from language specification. I believe that the W3C is wrong in this regard and I am actively trying to convince the W3C to change this. Until it happens, rtl directionality must be applied explicitly to every relevant element. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 14:25, 3 May 2012 (UTC)