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

RE: Ruby: Requirements and prioritization

From: Ishii, Koji a | Koji | BLD <koji.a.ishii@mail.rakuten.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 05:39:13 +0000
To: MURATA Makoto <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>, Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
CC: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, "CJK discussion (public-i18n-cjk@w3.org)" <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>, 董福興 <bobbytung@wanderer.tw>
Message-ID: <42B5352A6034154CBE9379DF4ADF1A32197AEE38@SIXPRD0310MB382.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com>
> > 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.
> I am wondering if they have written down requirements.

Let's stop discussing on whether double-sided ruby is required or not. The fact is that, it is required for some people. Not needed at all for others. So such two parties would never agree whether it's needed or not.

The feature should be designed to make it optional for people who doesn't need it, and if you don't need it, the feature does nothing bad to you.

Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2013 05:39:51 UTC

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