Most users don't care about any of that, either. And I would argue that i18n and l10n belong outside your language's framework (and obviously outside CSS).
This is 100% incorrect. Users do care about software being built for them, in a language they can understand and use, and they very much want it to be usable and accessible to them. You'll have to provide me with some citation showing otherwise for me to take that argument seriously.
> I would argue that i18n and l10n belong outside your language's framework (and obviously outside CSS).
Obviously Frameworks and CSS disagree with this assertion. Considering you've presented no argument though, I don't see why you would think that, for example, it wouldn't be important to style your site differently for different languages. Are Americans routinely reading rtl?
Edit: It just occurred to me you think this way because most everything you create is specifically created for you and those like you. You care, you just don't realize you care until it's taken away.
Accessibility is legally mandated in many cases and if you ever want to sell your app to government or enterprise customers, it’s likely to be a requirement.
Of course the way that text is written, displayed, rendered, formatted, etc is all highly language dependent and culture dependent.
"stop"
"STOP"
“Stop”
"STAHP"
These all mean different things even though it's just one language. To suggest that the way symbols are presented doesn't carry its own symbolic communication is willful ignorance at best, and at worst a kind of arrogant imposing that "my way of seeing things is the only correct way."
In a thread about the "bits of information transfer successfully encoded by AI on a UI implementation," I would expect an experienced engineer to notice the bandwidth of communication (or lack thereof) being demonstrated.
If we're taking that route, most people don't care about any specific thing, so we can just skip all this development effort and play video games all day.
