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

Re: Draft new ruby markup for HTML extension (ed comments)

From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 18:40:46 +0000
Message-ID: <511BDE2E.8090605@w3.org>
To: public-i18n-cjk@w3.org
First, let me say what I would have said in my previous note had I not 
run out of time: Many thanks for getting this draft out and for the hard 
work you put into it!

Here are some more, editorial, comments on the draft:

[1] Mono-ruby for individual base characters in Japanese

Why the 'in Japanese'?  Mono-ruby isn't specific to Japanese.

"One or more hiragana or katakana characters (the ruby annotation) are 
placed with each ideographic character (the base text)."

Mono-ruby can also be used with characters other than hiragana and 
katakana, even in Japanese.

I would propose, instead:

"Annotations (the ruby text) are associated individually with each 
ideographic character (the base text). In Japanese this is typically 
hiragana or katakana characters used to provide readings of kanji 

[2] Jukugo ruby

"The distinction is captured in this example: "

Actually the example doesn't quite capture it - the illustration makes 
jukugo ruby look like group ruby. It isn't. See the examples at the 
bottom of http://rishida.net/blog/?p=469 and you'll notice that gaps 
open up in some cases, because jukugo styling is basically just a 
special kind of ruby overhang where one character (and not more) can 
overhang an adjacent base character if it doesn't fit on its own base 
character.  Nor does jukugo styling prevent breakup of the underlying 
base characters.

The illustration ought to still have a vertical line between the last 
two hiragana rt characters.

[3] Jukugo ruby

"both base text and ruby annotations are implicitly placed in common 
containers so that the grouping information is captured"

See my other emails on this for substantive issues, but note, in 
passing, that the grouping information is perfectly well captured by the 
rb.rt.rb.rt model too. It is abundantly clear which ruby text maps to 
which base text, and where the line breaks can appear.

[4] Text with both phonetic and semantic annotations (double-sided ruby)

"Which is marked up as follows: "

If you mark up exactly as shown, you will actually introduce a bunch of 
unwanted spaces because of the line breaks.  Either include a note to 
say that this is an 'artists rendition' for easy reading, or show the 
markup as it really should be, ie. all on one line. (We already fixed 
this for the examples in the HTML5.)

[5] same section

"♥<rt>Heart<rtc lang=fr>Cœur"

There has to be a closing tag after Cœur, otherwise the parser will see 
"Cœur ☘" and get confused.


On 13/02/2013 11:59, Robin Berjon wrote:
> Hi all,
> based on previous discussions in the HTML WG, and on the ruby use cases
> document, I have put together a proposal for a new way of doing ruby in
> HTML that I hope both enables enough use cases and is consistent with
> the markup approach preferred in HTML (which is to say, it is less
> complicated than the full XHTML model).
> The goal is that this draft will become an HTML extension specification,
> which can then be integrated into HTML.
> Please read the current draft at:
>      http://darobin.github.com/html-ruby/
> I have also implemented the processing algorithm, which you can see in
> action at:
>      http://berjon.com/tmp/inception/playground/render-ruby/
> I would much appreciate your feedback in this matter before transmitting
> this to the HTML WG for review.

Richard Ishida
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2013 18:41:15 UTC

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