W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-cjk@w3.org > January to March 2014

[HTML5 Ruby] Tag omission rules for rt and rtc (was A typo and a question for Tag omission rules

From: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 06:59:20 +0000
To: "public-i18n-cjk@w3.org" <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>
Message-ID: <FEA11DF6-2140-4F24-9AAD-4FA541AB0C54@gluesoft.co.jp>
After digging further into this, I think tag omission rules for rt and rtc are not correct.

>From the tag omission rules in the ED[6]:
* rb, rtc, and rp auto-closes if immediately followed by rb, rt, rtc, or rp
* rt auto-closes if immediately followed by rb, rt, or rp

Issues are:
1. rtc should not auto-close if immediately followed by rt
2. rt should auto-close if immediately followed by rtc

I’ve file bug 25212[7].

[6] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/CR/syntax.html#syntax-tag-omission
[7] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25212

/koji

On Mar 27, 2014, at 5:32 PM, Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp> wrote:

> Never mind on rp tag omission; that was pointed out before[4] and already fixed[5] in the ED.
> 
> rtc not auto-closing rt still stands though. It’d be appreciated if this can be clarified.
> 
> [4] http://www.w3.org/mid/20140210111143.C76D.17D6BAFB@newphoria.co.jp
> [5] http://www.w3.org/mid/CA+ri+Vmu1+Z6A6geoz+4bPX78DDi0L3Hyn758HmdvhaFN-K+gw@mail.gmail.com
> 
> /koji
> 
> On Mar 27, 2014, at 5:06 AM, Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp> wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> A typo is in the “Tag omission in text/html” section of the <rp> element[1]:
>>> An rb element's end tag may be omitted if the rb element is immediately followed
>>> by an rb, rt, rtc or rp element, or if there is no more content in the parent element.
>> The first two “rb” are typo, should be “rp”. Note that 8.1.2.4 Optional tags section[2] looks ok.
>> 
>> A question is about the “Tag omission in text/html” section of the <rt> element[3]. While rb, rtc, and rp elements auto-closes with rb, rt, rtc, or rp, only rt does not auto-close with rtc. Is this intentional? I can’t find good reasons not to auto-close rt with rtc.
>> 
>> Double-sided ruby examples in the spec looks like expecting rt to auto-close with rtc, so I wonder this may also be a typo?
>> 
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/text-level-semantics.html#the-rp-element
>> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/syntax.html#syntax-tag-omission
>> [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/text-level-semantics.html#the-rt-element
>> 
>> /koji
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 31 March 2014 06:59:53 UTC

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