I came across this issue recently and was surprised after all these years there still isn't colspan support. Ended up having to create additional containers when I should be able to style it using CSS.
adding role="presentation" to a <table> element will tell screenreaders to treat the element and its required children as non-semantic. I still say using a table for layout (of non-tabular data) is should be a last resort but it's easy for me to say since making a layout is rarely my job.
> No, it matters which part of the weapon hits the enemy. With the hammer for instance, you really need to aim it right - to hit the enemy with the head part and not the hilt part.
I haven't played bloodborne but if it's anything like its predecessors that shouldn't be the only mechanic at play.
Weapons that combo (which in bloodborne seems to be all of them) will do different amounts of damage on different stages of the combo and if your hit connects during an active frame of the enemy it will get a counter attack damage bonus (based off of the thrust damage of your attack).
Storing away all of geocities for future reference is a good thing. Having every children memorize passages from geocities would be pointless and no one does it.
Having them learn a dead language is cruel, you are wasting their time to make them learn something that will only serve to keep them isolated.
And it's all in vain, making a language alive is the opposite of preserving it because live languages change.
No-one is arguing that children from minority communities should be prevented from learning an international language. The only question is whether they should be prevented from learning the language of their heritage.
Multilingualism is the norm. And it's easy enough to learn Math in English, English in English, and literature in your mother tongue.
It would be impossible to do. Even back in 1991 when unicode was conceived almost all the encodings in use were ASCII-compatible.
For languages that would be affected by a greco-unification that meant the encodings that were in use before unicode had both the latin script and their "national" script.
Implementing greco-unification in unicode would mean that round-trip lossless conversion (from origin encoding to unicode back into origin encoding) would be impossible, greatly limiting unicode's adoption.
No such problem existed with han characters, in fact JIS X 0208 (the character set used for Shift-JIS) did a very similar thing to unicode's han unification.
In absence of backwards compatibility problems I would be in favor of greco-unification too.
According to Wikipedia, this is being coordinated by the Ideographic Rapporteur Group, and "the working members of the IRG are either appointed by member governments, or are invited experts from other countries. IRG members include Mainland China, Hong Kong, Macau, Taipei Computer Association, Singapore, Japan, South Korea, North Korea, Vietnam and United States."
So this criticism of English speakers seems pretty unfounded! And his concerns about unification is being driven by a diverse group of experts in a variety of countries - so not sure why the concern?