- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 09:35:02 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10830 fantasai <fantasai.bugs@inkedblade.net> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED CC| |fantasai.bugs@inkedblade.ne | |t Resolution|WONTFIX | --- Comment #2 from fantasai <fantasai.bugs@inkedblade.net> 2010-09-30 09:35:02 UTC --- In addition to the markup compatibility concerns raised above, there's another one: that having an <rb> element allows styling of the ruby base text independently of the ruby text. This is needed for example to control line breaking: depending on type of ruby contents and on the styling of the document, line breaking may or may not be allowed at otherwise-valid breakpoints in the ruby base text. I agree that in the general case, the markup is much simpler if ruby bases are implied by the <rt> markup. However, in some cases it is necessary to have a more concrete element to address. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 30 September 2010 09:35:04 UTC