Re: Arguments against HTML double-sided ruby (was: Re: Memo from ruby disucssion with Roland) from Leif Halvard Silli on 2012-02-29 (public-i18n-cjk@w3.org from January to March 2012)

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 17:18:08 +0100
To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Cc: MURATA Makoto <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>, "public-i18n-cjk@w3.org" <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>, Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <20120229171808162980.0e3fccf0@xn--mlform-iua.no>

Just a typo:

Leif Halvard Silli, Wed, 29 Feb 2012 17:02:29 +0100:
> But is there not a 
> big risk that even if we only permit and support nested ruby, some 
> authors will nevertheless create double ruby

I meant: 'even if we only permit and support _single_ ruby'
-- 
Leif Halvard Silli

Received on Wednesday, 29 February 2012 16:18:42 UTC