W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > June 2011

[Bug 12935] <rt> should not auto-close ancestors

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2011 16:29:57 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1QWA1V-0005qX-Mo@jessica.w3.org>

--- Comment #9 from fantasai <fantasai.bugs@inkedblade.net> 2011-06-13 16:29:52 UTC ---
I can't say I'm too familiar with the way HTML parsing works, but I would
  - We won't need any markup beyond what's in XHTML Ruby Annotation
  - We're likely to need <rb> and <rtc>, if not now, then at some point in the

<rbc> seems mostly useless to me, but could be kept around for compat with
XHTML Ruby Annotation markup.

Wrt mixing other elements and ruby, I've heard it suggested for e.g. Chinese to
mark up an entire paragraph with phonetics by placing the entire paragraph
inside <ruby>. If you want to support that, then you don't actually want to
have <rt> auto-close a <b>.

My uninformed opinion is that you should have any ruby markup's closing tag
auto-close anything that was opened inside it. I don't think we need to support
mis-nested tags here.

In an ideal world I would have:
  * <rt> autoclose <rt>, <rb>, <rp>, <rbc>
  * <rb> autoclose <rt>, <rb>, <rp>, <rtc>
  * <rp> autoclose <rt>, <rb>, <rp>, <rbc>
  * <rtc> autoclose <rt>, <rb>, <rp>, <rtc>, <rbc>
  * <rbc> autoclose <rt>, <rp>, <rtc>, <rbc>
  * Any ruby closing tag (including an autoclose) close anything opened
    inside that element

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 Monday, 13 June 2011 16:29:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:52 UTC