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

Re: Ruby: Requirements and prioritization

From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 16:01:54 +0000
Message-ID: <512CDC72.1080803@w3.org>
To: MURATA Makoto <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>
CC: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "CJK discussion (public-i18n-cjk@w3.org)" <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>, 董福興 <bobbytung@wanderer.tw>
Apologies for not including Murata-san's text below, but I can't find 
the original email in my mail client for some reason.

Note that the proposals in the ruby extension for HTML5 introduce 
improvements for single-sided ruby, vis. the rb element and a markup 
syntax that allows for better fallback. The double-sided markup support 
is just a small extension of that basic approach.

I am hearing from Google Japan that they are seeing requirements for 
double-sided ruby from their users.  I believe that Amazon are also 
interested in getting support.

Note that the HTML5 ruby extension supports the markup needed for 
double-sided ruby. CSS ruby-position will indeed be needed to move away 
from the *default* positioning of both single- and double-sided ruby, 
but browsers are currently managing to display single-sided ruby 
correctly without CSS, and presumably they could do so in a default 
fashion for double-sided also while we await the completion of the CSS 
Ruby Module.

That's not to say that we shouldn't work on the CSS spec. What's needed 
for that, however, is people willing and able to help move the spec 
forward.  Does anyone know of anyone willing to help?

RI


PS: I will reply to the bopomofo comments separately.




-- 
Richard Ishida
W3C
http://rishida.net/
Received on Tuesday, 26 February 2013 16:02:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 26 February 2013 16:02:26 GMT