W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-i18n-comments@w3.org > September 2006

Re: [Comment on ITS WD] Make the application of legacy ruby clearer

From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 12:30:22 +0900
Message-ID: <4504D84E.9020008@w3.org>
To: ishida@w3.org
Cc: www-i18n-comments@w3.org, public-i18n-core@w3.org, public-i18n-its@w3.org

Hello i18n core,

This is a reply on behalf of the i18n ITS working group. See also
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3506 for our discussion.

Thank you very much for your comment. We agreed to implement it. Please
have a look at
http://www.w3.org/International/its/itstagset/itstagset.html#ruby-implementation
, especially example 36.



Please let us know within 2 weeks if you are satisfied. If we don't hear
 from you , we will assume this issue as closed.

Regards,

Felix


ishida@w3.org wrote:
> Comment from the i18n review of:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-its-20060518/
> 
> Comment 36
> At http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/0606-its/
> Editorial/substantive: E
> Owner: RI
> 
> Location in reviewed document:
> 6.6.3
> 
> Comment: 
> It is very poorly explained what the difference is between this and the situation described in the last para of 6.6.2.
> 
> 
> How about:
> 
> 
> "Where legacy formats do no contain ruby markup conformant to [Ruby-TR], it is still possible to associate ruby text with a specified range of document content using the rubyRule element."
> 
> 
> Note also s/and there one wants/and where one wants/
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 11 September 2006 03:30:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:32:36 GMT