W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-cjk@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: Fwd: Re: HTML Ruby Extension

From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 13:31:40 +0000
Message-ID: <511B95BC.5070706@w3.org>
To: "CJK discussion (public-i18n-cjk@w3.org)" <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>

On 13/02/2013 12:04, Richard Ishida wrote:
>> [2] a more significant issue:
>> I think the markup proposed for jukugo ruby is too complicated for the
>> general case
>> <ruby><rb>上<rb>手<rt>じよう<rt>ず</ruby>
>> should just be
>> <ruby>上<rt>じよう</rt>手<rt>ず</ruby>

or <ruby>上<rt>じよう<rb>手<rt>ず</ruby>
(which is easier to author and read)

>> jukugo ruby is just mono-ruby - it's the styling that makes the
>> difference, by allowing slightly more complicated overlapping than you
>> would for mono-ruby.
> I understand that, but I believe that the container information also
> needs to be available if you're going to style as jukugo. Hence this
> model. Otherwise how can you distinguish them for styling purposes?

I initially wondered the same thing, many months ago, and it was one of 
the main reasons I wanted to look more into the complex ruby question. 
But we ended up concluding that you distinguish sequences that should be 
handled with jukugo-styling from other sequences that are not by using a 
class name to apply the style.  Just as you would apply other approaches 
to styling the position of ruby text, such as nakatsuki (centred) or 
katatsuki (edge aligned).

Essentially, I think that what you are implying here is that use of the 
rb.rb.rt.rt approach automatically forces the browser to treat the ruby 
as juguko-styled. But you don't always want juguko-styling on words with 
more than one ruby text - especially in Chinese.

 From the JLReq doc:
    "Books commonly adopt kana-based jukugo-ruby for ideographic
    compound words. However, due to technical difficulties for rendering
    jukugo-ruby in machine-assisted text layout, the adoption of
    kana-based mono-ruby is increasing. For example, newspapers do not
    use jukugo-ruby, and study aids generally use mono-ruby because it
    is considered more important to show the readings of each
    ideographic character (cl-19) for students than to be concerned
    about the beauty of the layout."

    "Similarly, a Japanese personal name consists of a given name and a
    family name, which together form a compound of a full name, and it
    is an editorial decision whether to attach two runs of ruby, one
    each for given name and family name, or to attach the full ruby text
    to the compound which represents the reading of the full name."

So presumably if you don't want that for a particular sequence of 
characters you would have to revert to the rb.rt.rb.rt approach,
ie. the author would have to carefully distinguish between two different 
ways of marking up in order to get the right styling.

Tying the markup model to a specifically Japanese styling, and one that 
the Japanese Layout Task Force actually sees as a nice to have, doesn't 
seem to me to be a good idea.


Richard Ishida
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2013 13:32:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:10:24 UTC