- From: Chen Yijun via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2016 10:06:27 +0000
- To: public-i18n-archive@w3.org
@r12a Hello! ๐ Sorry for taking this long to reply, had been busy. > This doesn't seem right to me, not least because U+FF3F is not a combining character. I think what we are actually talking about is underline, isn't it? (in which case this subsection about fullwidth low line should be moved to a new location) It is intentional here choosing a character over text decorations. We consider these usage as punctuation marks, hence it is reasonable here stating proper name marks and title marks as characters [1]. And since they are both punctuation marks, font designers and typographers, in my opinion, should have a say in how they look and where they are put, etc (by designing these characters in typefaces). It is not only a task of browser/reader rendering. We can see the similar concept in both <i>JLReq</i> and <i>CLReq</i> where emphasis marks are stated as either `๏น ` or `โข`. (By using `text-emphasis` property of CSS, it is easy to attach text with non-combining characters.) The project is a set of *requirements* of layouts. The above-mentioned subsection of the document does not, in any way, suggest or imply that we implement such feature with combining character technology of Unicode or the `<u>` element of HTML. It simply indicates the most idealistic solution. In which case, proper name marks and title marks are both *characters* just like commas, periods and emphasis marks, plus the gap thing @bobbytung said about. The text decoration solution/fallback seems perfect to me too. We can use the `<u>` element to annotate proper names in HTML documents along side with `text-emphasis` or `text-decoration` to style the element. Either way is fine. I wonโt resist using text decorations when it comes to reality. ๐ \[1]: http://language.moe.gov.tw/001/Upload/FILES/SITE_CONTENT/M0001/HAU/h13.htm -- GitHub Notification of comment by ethantw Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/clreq/issues/115#issuecomment-263055089 using your GitHub account
Received on Saturday, 26 November 2016 10:06:33 UTC