On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 7:07 AM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
wrote:
> On 11/16/2014 10:41 PM, Xidorn Quan wrote:
>
>> Currently it is undefined that how ruby-align should be applied
>> if there are spanning annotations.
>>
>> When previously discussed off the list, fantasai said that the
>> behavior would be equivalent to nested markup. However, I don't
>> think it is workable. With nested markup, there is a unique
>> ruby-align value applied to the whole inner ruby, while we may
>> have different values for each level when handling spanning.
>> On the other hand, in cases like <rbc><rb>a</rb></rbc><rtc>xyz</rtc>,
>> whether the content in the rtc is recognized as a span could
>> affect the result, which does not look correct to me.
>>
>> I suggest that, in those situations, non-spanning pairs are
>> directly expanded to match the width of the whole ruby, as if they
>> have a longer annotation in some level, regardless of ruby-align.
>> This could solve both problems I mentioned above.
>>
>
> I'm confused. Can you give a more specific problematic example?
>
Sorry for not describing clearly. For example, if we have something like
<ruby>
<rbc style="ruby-align: start"><rb>ab</rb><rb>c</rb></rbc>
<rtc style="ruby-align: center"><rt>x</rt><rt>yz</rt></rtc>
<rtc>a very very long span</rtc>
</ruby>
How should the boxes be aligned? You said that would be the same as nested
markup, so it is something like:
<ruby>
<ruby>
<rbc style="ruby-align: start"><rb>ab</rb><rb>c</rb></rbc>
<rtc style="ruby-align: center"><rt>x</rt><rt>yz</rt></rtc>
</ruby>
<rtc>a very very long span</rtc>
</ruby>
Then the result would be the first one in the figure below. However, the
second one looks more reasonable to me.
> <rbc><rb>a</rb></rbc><rtc>xyz</rtc> in particular doesn't look
> like a problem, it should behave exactly as <rb>a</rb><rt>xyz</rt>.
>
Consider something like:
<ruby>
<rbc style="ruby-align: start">a</rbc>
<rtc>a very very long span</rtc>
</ruby>
If the <rtc/> forms a span, and the span has the behavior equivalent to
nested markup, the result would be different from <rb/><rt/>:
Does it make sense?
- Xidorn
