W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-cjk@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: <rp> fallback in complex ruby.

From: Shiozawa, Hajime <hajime.shiozawa@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 18:18:39 +0900
Message-ID: <AANLkTimiJ9+RSg2fdCOMpY6oR1ijejxL3ky5S70JteXz@mail.gmail.com>
To: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
Cc: "public-i18n-cjk@w3.org" <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>
Thank you for your reply.
And sorry for it being late.

> When complex ruby was designed in late 90's, the most major browser was Netscape 4, and we had no idea if NS4 would ever support ruby. The complex ruby was designed to fallback gracefully for browsers that has no knowledge of ruby.

I didn't know that the complex ruby was designed to fallback.

> But today, I think we can think two different types of the "fallback"; one is where a browser has no knowledge of ruby, the other is where a browser does not prefer rendering ruby because of screen real estate or user preferences.

I agree with you.

>I think the former is less important today. If this assumption is correct, I think we can develop a new type of the "fallback"; that is, a browser knows about ruby, but just doesn't want to render above the base characters. In this case, a browser could display this markup:
>
><ruby>
>漢<rt>かん</rt>
>字<rt>じ</rt>
></ruby>
>
>as:	
> 漢字(かんじ)
>
>using its own intelligence.
>
>I have to admit that I'm not very familiar with how strict HTML5/CSS Ruby allows or prohibits such kind of rendering, but what I'm saying is that, we should forget about the true "fallback" when a browser has no knowledge of ruby, and start thinking about graceful "inline" display of ruby. These two, as far as I understand, are considered to be the same today, but making these two separate ideas may be able to resolve the situation.


I disagree that the old fallback is less important today.
The new fallback is good but I think that the old fallback should not
be forgotten.

Now major browsers started to have ruby knowledge.
So it is best to render the new fallback inline ruby in all browsers.
But there are no implementation of new fallback as I know of and the
implementation has certain costs.
I appreciate if new browser implements the new fallback positively,
but I think it is hard at the moment.

My opinion is that the complex ruby takes effort to write but it is
useful for the old fallback and it has strong markup for various ruby
typography.

I would like to know your idea about complex ruby.

Regards,
Hajime.


-- 
# 青山学院大学大学院
# 理工学研究科  知能情報コース
# 塩澤 元 (Shiozawa, Hajime)
# mail: hajime.shiozawa@gmail.com
Received on Friday, 17 December 2010 09:19:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:10:22 UTC