W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-core@w3.org > July to September 2011

[Bug 10830] i18n comment : Please add support for rb

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 05:05:04 +0000
To: public-i18n-core@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1R6bT6-0005Pw-29@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10830

--- Comment #51 from Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> 2011-09-22 05:05:02 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #50)
> Since the main argument here is that <rb> is useful, it would be helpful if
> people could provide links to pages that actually style the <rb> element or in
> some other sense make use of it, i.e., evidence that the element is actually
> useful to authors.

I think you should 'cut some slack' due to the bad support for <ruby> -
especially for <rb>. This has affected how it is used, I think. It is similar
to the bad support for <abbr> in legacy IE. That said, here are some
interactive examples:

(1)  ruby:hover rt{hightlight}, see:
     http://sites.google.com/site/funnyepiphany/customize/stylesheet
     This is (merely) evidence that authors want to use interactivity with
ruby. To place the hover on rb:hover{} instead of on ruby:hover{} only has the
effect that it is more precise in what it hightlight.

(2) Though they (due to the historically bad browser support) use the table
element instead of <ruby>, the furiganizer.com hightlights the rubyfied text on
hover: http://www.furiganizer.com/     

(3) Furigana injector: http://code.google.com/p/furigana-injector/ 
     This is a browser extension that works with Chrome and and other browsers
and which fetches ruby terms from a server and inserts them as ruby annotation
via javascript. It uses <rb>. I don't know whether <rb> is important - please
analyse.

(4) The yomoyomo.jp site adds ruby on the fly too via javascript, using<rb>:
     Example: http://yomoyomo.jp/content.php?yyparam=00500101&t=

     Neither (3) or (4) use hover styles. But if you try some userCSS and
compare the effect of rb:hover{} and and ruby{} hover, then the form only
highlights the very text inside the rb element. Whereas if you use the
ruby{hover{} it highlights the square area of the entire ruby element. To use
rb:hover{} feels more accurate - given that it only focuses on the base word
and not the entire ruby element.

(5) http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/振假名 This page user ruby and it
hightlights the base words with bold style. Unfortuneatly the page uses <b>
instead of CSS. Nevertheless, had the author chosen to apply
ruby{font-weight:bold} then he would also have had to apply
rt{font-weight:normal}, to undoo the styling for the <rt> element. Thus, the
keeing the <rb> allows for simpler CSS.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 22 September 2011 05:05:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 22 September 2011 05:05:12 GMT