- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2011 05:57:28 +0000
- To: public-i18n-cjk@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13113 --- Comment #21 from Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp> 2011-12-04 05:57:25 UTC --- > Fallback if we rely on this simple pattern is suboptimal, but that doesn't seem > to be a big deal. It's time for implementations to just implement ruby. AT > fallback is not impossible in any of these cases and is unaffected by how we > mark it up. Fallback isn't only for browsers without ruby support. One UA vendor I know considered using fallback when ruby is too small to read, but gave up due to the text quality issue fantasai pointed out. -- Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Sunday, 4 December 2011 06:00:42 UTC