- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2021 01:04:32 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
The CSS Working Group just discussed `[css-ruby] visibility:collapse on ruby annotations`. <details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary> <astearns> topic: [css-ruby] visibility:collapse on ruby annotations<br> <astearns> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5927<br> <fantasai> s/???/nicole/6<br> <fantasai> fantasai^: And make sure it works on slow connections<br> <dlibby> florian: ruby has a number of use, but primary use is Japanese/Chinese annotation of ideographs for pronunciation<br> <dlibby> florian: different preferences based on how experienced you are with the language<br> <dlibby> florian: printed - in school you get most annotations, others not<br> <fantasai> s/language/language, and what reading disabilities you might have<br> <dlibby> florian: but on digital media, can you hide bits that you don't want to see?<br> <fantasai> florian: display:none doesn't work because it breaks pairing<br> <fantasai> florian: visibility:hidden doesn't work because the annotation still takes up space in the layout<br> <dlibby> florian: display:none fails because removes the box, box pairing is necessary, visibility:hidden doesn't work, pairing works fine, but still takes up space<br> <myles> q+<br> <dlibby> visibility:hidden may expand spacing made room for but it's not visible so that's not great<br> <dlibby> florian: visibility:collapse is another keyword, is a natural use here<br> <dlibby> florian: hids the annotation, but keeps a box preserving alignment<br> <astearns> ack myles<br> <dlibby> myles: two examples - people that don't want pronunciation and those who are dyslexic and may get confused, wouldn't author hide all?/<br> <dlibby> florian: maybe, maybe not. children-targeted annotations may only hide the 'easy' ones<br> <dlibby> florian: or perhaps you're practicing and you don't want the help for certain characters<br> <dlibby> myles: could this be a browser feature instead of individual webpages?<br> <dlibby> fantasai: but authors do need the ability to customize this<br> <dlibby> fantasai: also can autohide things that are not perfect matches for the text<br> <dlibby> fantasai: might need an exact string comparison to achieve this, but having some way to accomplish autohiding seems like a good thing<br> <dlibby> myles: use case is perhaps a bit narrow - this is yet another 'make it invisible'<br> <dlibby> florian: it's an existing mechanism<br> <dlibby> myles: but you're creating something new for ruby<br> <fantasai> s/achieve this/do auto-hiding/<br> <fantasai> s/seems like/manuall seems like/<br> <dlibby> florian: visibility:hidden almost does what you want, but the box consumes space, you could make it small via !important but is not great<br> <dlibby> dholbert: what about contain:size with visibility:hidden?<br> <dlibby> dholbert: does that cover all the use cases?<br> <dlibby> florian: contain:size does not apply to ruby boxes, if we're going to make new things apply, visibility:collapse makes more sense and is probably more scoped<br> <dlibby> astearns: is anyone using these hacks? do we know what things are easier/harder?<br> <dlibby> astearns: if no one is performing hacks today to solve this, do we need support in browsers<br> <dlibby> florian: there have been requests from ??? organiziations in Japan<br> <dlibby> florian: they want to write all possible ways to display and have the user/author choose, but current implementations of ruby make it such that it is unreliable<br> <fantasai> s/???/DAISY/<br> <dlibby> fantasai: we did get requests from a11y orgs in Japan, didn't make it up<br> <dlibby> astears: curious if exisitence of hacks can estimate how much people are running into this?<br> <dlibby> iank: does visibility:collapse influence the container size?<br> <dlibby> iank: mental model is that it affects the container, but removes itself at the last minute<br> <dlibby> iank: doesn't seem to be the case here<br> <florian> q+<br> <dlibby> iank: that's what happens with table and flex, i beileve<br> <dlibby> fantasai: flex affects one dimension but not the other<br> <dlibby> fantasai: we could specify it similarly for ruby<br> <dlibby> fantasai: it's a layout model specific thing - collapse the thing to see the layout without it, but dont' remove the box from the tree, but re-show in a dynamic way w/o disturbing<br> <dlibby> fantasai: this means different things in different models<br> <dlibby> fantasai: in flexbox affects space in one, but not the other. ruby proposal is to treat the same as autohidden ruby<br> <fantasai> s/re-show/have ability to re-show/<br> <dlibby> florian: riffing on 'yet another way to hide' - it already hides, the way in which proposed hiding is already a thing in ruby<br> <dlibby> florian: just marrying an existing property/value to existing behavior - don't need to invent anything new<br> <dlibby> astears: we're over time, perhaps can bring up again in the future<br> <dlibby> s/astears/astearns/<br> </details> -- GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5927#issuecomment-777899377 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Friday, 12 February 2021 01:04:34 UTC