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

Re: Ruby extension: empty ruby text

From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 16:37:24 +0100
Message-ID: <5138B434.1050600@w3.org>
To: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
CC: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>, 'WWW International' <www-international@w3.org>, CJK discussion <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>, Ishii Koji <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
On 06/03/2013 16:27 , Richard Ishida wrote:
> Well i, too, was very much hoping that what you describe here would be
> true. But when I asked Robin about it, he told me that there is no rb
> element in the DOM if there is no rb tag.
>
> Robin, did I get that right? Would it be difficult to change that?
> (Since I think it would help a lot.)

Correct: the current proposed model does not generate elements. I think 
that generating elements would increase the complexity of the HTML 
parsing algorithm in a way that would likely be disliked by implementers 
(the initial feedback I have received on the idea has certainly been 
negative).

If there is implementer support for that it's certainly something we can 
do, though (it won't be pretty to look at, mind you :).

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Thursday, 7 March 2013 15:37:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 7 March 2013 15:37:39 GMT