W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2013

RE: [text-decor-3] Emphasis marks and ruby

From: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2013 01:50:57 -0500
To: MURAKAMI Shinyu <murakami@antenna.co.jp>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, CJK discussion <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>, 'WWW International' <www-international@w3.org>
Message-ID: <A592E245B36A8949BDB0A302B375FB4E201BF47339@MAILR001.mail.lan>
> > Question 1:
> >
> >    Should we remove allowing to hide ruby when emphasis marks are present?
> >    a) yes
> >    b) no
> a) yes.
> The ruby text is a part of the document content and the emphasis marks are a style.
> Dropping content text is worse than dropping styles.

Looks like we're hearing two opposite opinions. The current wording was proposed by JLTF and also supported by some publishers. As I recall, emphasis marks are specified by authors, while most of ruby are by editors and it can vary by target audiences (the same book can have more ruby if it's targeted for younger audiences.) Some ruby can be specified by authors, which complicates the situation though.

Now I heard at a Japanese ML that one of widely used Japanese e-book format hides emphasis marks in this case, so I propose to allow both implementations for now, and may add more properties to control the behavior in future.


Received on Monday, 4 February 2013 06:51:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 11 February 2015 12:35:22 UTC