W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-ig-jp@w3.org > January 2012

FW: HTML5 and ruby

From: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 11:50:18 -0500
To: "public-html-ig-jp@w3.org" <public-html-ig-jp@w3.org>
Message-ID: <A592E245B36A8949BDB0A302B375FB4E0D3297C925@MAILR001.mail.lan>

●I18N WG、fantasai、Leif Halvard Silli、村田氏などはオプションとしてrbタグを許容すべき、という意見。必須とすると、簡単なルビを記述する際にも書かなければいけないのはよくないが、親文字だけをスタイリングしたい人とか、両側にルビを付けたい場合にはあった方が有用であり、そのため、使いたい人は使える仕様にしてほしい、という意見です。
●HTML5 editorのIan氏は、有害であり、禁止すべき、という意見です。

にお送りいただけると、I18N WGでまとめてHTML WGとの議論に含めさせていただきますので、お聞かせいただけますでしょうか?

日本語がよければ、こちらのMLに投げていただければ、私がまとめてI18N WGに伝えます。


-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Ishida [mailto:ishida@w3.org] 
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2012 12:54 AM
To: CJK discussion (public-i18n-cjk@w3.org)
Subject: HTML5 and ruby

Ian Hickson, the HTML5 editor, is waiting for us to make some clear recommendations about whether rb is needed for simple ruby markup, and how to approach complex ruby support.

Time is now pressing. We have until February 11th to submit a change proposal.

In order to help focus the discussions on the bugzilla threads at
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10830 (Please add support for rb) and

I produced a wiki page at

that shows alternative approaches that meet various use cases, and offers pros and cons for each.

Please give your opinions, with reasoned arguments, on which approaches work best. Please try not to focus on one small aspect, but consider things within the wider framework. Note that we are not focusing on the legacy usage of rb as much as on how to make the markup as simple and effective as possible going forward.

Here are some key questions:

1. do we need rb for simple ruby, or will span suffice? (take into account the use case related to fallback)

2. do we need rb and rtc for complex ruby support, or is it sufficient to rely on a mixture of recursive ruby markup plus a second <rt> element (depending on the use case)?

I look forward to hearing from you.  To avoid fragmentation, and because we can't discuss rb without discussing complex ruby, the i18n WG proposes that we make our comments on this list, and then put a summary proposal to the editor before the deadline for the change proposal.

Best regards,

PS: Leif Halvard Silli has independently submitted a change proposal by himself at http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/IncludeRB

Richard Ishida
Internationalization Activity Lead
W3C (World Wide Web Consortium)



Received on Wednesday, 18 January 2012 16:53:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:05:30 UTC