W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > September 2007

Re: Ruby in HTML

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2007 16:08:51 +0900
Message-Id: <E951B4DC-7C7C-4FE7-94FD-7C117AB33EBF@w3.org>
Cc: "'HTML WG'" <public-html@w3.org>, "'Richard Ishida'" <rishida@w3.org>, <michelsu@microsoft.com>, "'Chris Wilson'" <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, <piro@p.club.ne.jp>
To: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>

Hi Richard, Hi Ian,

Richard Ishida (30 août 2007 - 00:22) :
> I'm not sure of the best way to proceed.  It sounds like some  
> improvements
> need to be made to the spec, (although I wonder whether they are  
> not just
> the same kinds of change that are being worked on the HTML 4.01  
> spec by
> HTML5).  For that to happen, we need more specific pointers to what  
> needs to
> be improved.

I think it would help people in the WG, if you could do a report on  
the precise state of art of Ruby Markup.
People in the WG are interested by what is implemented *right now* in  
browsers and authoring tools.

For each feature, you could tell the WG
What is working?
What is buggy?
What is not implemented at all?

If you know of other types of implementations which benefit from Ruby  
Markup, please tell us. It would be good to test for each browsers  
you might know of.

> In particular, we need to be clear whether needed improvements
> relate to the ruby markup model described in the ruby annotation  
> spec, or
> whether they are needed to specify expected behaviour in HTML  
> specifically.

This will be possible once we know how it is implemented.

Ian (Hickson), would it be possible  to know how many documents are  
available with ruby markup? I guess not a lot.

> The next question is, should we
> A. copy the ruby annotation spec into the HTML5 spec and improve it  
> there?
> B. produce a new version of the ruby annotation spec?
> C. keep the ruby annotation spec separate, but add any needed rules  
> to the
> HTML5 spec to clarify ambiguities for an HTML context.

I think without having knowing the state of implementation first, it  
will be difficult to know what we have to do.

> Much will depend on the nature of the improvements that need to be  
> made.
> Note that the ruby annotation spec is not intended to be HTML- 
> specific.

Not at all from the current specification.

     "Ruby" are short runs of text alongside the base
     text, typically used in East Asian documents to
     indicate pronunciation or to provide a short
     annotation. This specification defines markup for
     ruby, in the form of an XHTML module [XHTMLMOD].

     -- Ruby Annotation
     Thu, 31 May 2001 12:47:31 GMT

Though from what I remember, IE had a kind of partial implementation  
in HTML documents, because IE doesn't support application/xhtml+xml.

> It would be good to keep the ruby spec separate so that it can be  
> referenced
> by other specs such as ITS.

No troubles.

> Btw, if we do make substantive changes to the way the ruby spec  
> works, I'd
> like to see three levels of conformance rather than just the  
> current two.
> Ie. Rather than simple ruby / complex ruby, I'd like to see simple  
> ruby /
> multiple ruby / complex-table-like positioning for ruby.

Could you explain what do you mean?

> I think the starting point, however, is for someone to document  
> clearly the
> needed improvements to the current ruby annotation spec, by  
> pointing to the
> text of the spec where things need to be changed or added.

What is the state of implementation?

> RI
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Karl Dubost [mailto:karl@w3.org]
>> Sent: 15 August 2007 02:53
>> To: HTML WG
> ...
>> * I18N
>> Richard Ishida,
>> Do you have input on how to achieve Ruby in HTML?
>> I have not cc: i18n to avoid too many cross-postings and lost threads
>> * Internet Explorer
>> Chris Wilson,
>> Do you know who was/is in charge of Ruby implementation in Internet
>> Explorer?
>> Michel Suignard maybe?
>> His/her feedback would be welcome for having a better specification.
>> * Mozilla
>> SHIMODA-san, do you still work on Ruby for Mozilla, do you have any
>> information with regards a possible implementation of ruby in HTML 5.
>> XHTML Ruby Support
>> http://piro.sakura.ne.jp/xul/_rubysupport.html.en
>> * What about Opera, Safari, NetFront, etc. and others?
>> Here an example of a site which takes a page
>> and gives the hiragana, romaji spelling of the characters in  
>> brackets.
>> http://yomoyomo.jp/?yyparam=00000101&l=&t=http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/
>> Issues by Anne.
>>> 1. Detailed processing requirements for user agents such as
>>>     what should happen when elements are incorrectly nested, etc.
>>>     and what that implies for tools extracting semantics.
>>> 2. Integrating it in the HTML parser in a way that is
>>>     compatible with the subset of Ruby that Internet Explorer
>>>     supports.
>>> Of those two, the main problem is probably number 2. Maybe
>> there is
>>> also an issue describing the exact semantics of ruby elements, I
>>> haven't checked the ruby specification in a while...
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_character
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/ruby
>> -- 
>> Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
>> W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead
>>    QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/
>>       *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***

Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead
   QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/
      *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Monday, 3 September 2007 07:09:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:26 UTC