W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-cjk@w3.org > January to March 2011

[Bug 10830] i18n comment : Please add support for rb

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 21:49:48 +0000
To: public-i18n-cjk@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1Pd8Zg-0006db-9A@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10830

--- Comment #9 from fantasai <fantasai.bugs@inkedblade.net> 2011-01-12 21:49:47 UTC ---
So I've heard several problems so far with the lack of the <rb> tag currently,
and also in talking with a number of people about the appropriate styling of
ruby text. Here's the summary:

1. Compat: Markup compatibility with existing documents that use <rb>.

2. Styling: More straightforward styling of the base text.

3. Accessibility: Can easily identify and hide base text, replacing it
   with the ruby text for children and others who have trouble with kanji.
   rb { display: none; } rt { display: inline; }

4. Fallback: Current HTML5 markup does not allow appropriate fallback for
   multi-syllable ruby (example below).

The example for fallback is the following: Tokyo is written with two kanji
characters, &#26481;, which is pronounced &#12392;&#12358;, and &#20140;, which
is pronounced &#12365;&#12423;&#12358;. Each base character should be annotated
individually.

     _   _      _  _  _
    |_| |_|    |_||_||_|  
  +---------+ +---------+
  |         | |         |
  |         | |         |
  |         | |         |
  |         | |         |
  +---------+ +---------+

However the fallback should be
&#26481;&#20140;(&#12392;&#12358;&#12365;&#12423;&#12358;) not
&#26481;(&#12392;&#12358;)&#20140;(&#12365;&#12423;&#12358;). This could be
achieved if the ruby could be written as
  <ruby>
    <rb>&#26481;</rb><rb>&#20140;</rb>
    <rt>&#12392;&#12358;</rt><rt>&#12365;&#12423;&#12358;</rt>
  </ruby>

(The behavior here would be the same as for DT+DD+ sets inside a DL.)

5. Advanced ruby layouts: In addition to fallback, this would allow the markup
to express both the correspondance between rb rt pairs and the grouping of rt
and rb sets, which can then be exploited by the styling system to handle the
various styling requirements of such ruby. (Specifically, ruby sets like this
can be styled with the ruby text apart or grouped together--this is a stylistic
choice, not a markup one--but even if grouped together breaking the line must
keep corresponding <rt> and <rb> pairs together.)

The last two require extending the way ruby behaves in HTML5, which probably
would be a separate bug, but they also require the <rb> tag to exist, which is
the issue here.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You reported the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 12 January 2011 21:49:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 12 January 2011 21:49:50 GMT