I'd have to check if this is really useful, but yes, it might open some exiting possibilities.

Still, this is not sufficient to hold off from skins per language. I was looking into using the IPortable interface to port DSL websites into core ML sites. This would require a link between different language versions of the same module in DSL which is now missing but being considered for DSL 4.

However, if such an important feature is missing in the core, porting will never be complete. Yes, you can port to core ML but it has its restrictions: you may have to rework some skins to combine all language differences in one skin. Call in the experts, my designer doesn't know how it works.

Anyway, separate css is not always enough. If your language's text direction is up to down, you may still need a different skin layout, css might not do. I heavily advocate consistency in the user interface, but the utmost flexibility should be offered for cultural variation. That means skins per language.

This is not an issue for me. This is an issue for future large customers, the ones you may hope to earn money from. For the users of the CE, the existing solutions are much more flexible, as this issue shows. It should not be that way.

---

____________________________________
The one-eyed in the land of the blind.