- From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 13:31:40 +0000
- To: "CJK discussion (public-i18n-cjk@w3.org)" <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>
On 13/02/2013 12:04, Richard Ishida wrote: >> [2] a more significant issue: >> >> I think the markup proposed for jukugo ruby is too complicated for the >> general case >> >> <ruby><rb>上<rb>手<rt>じよう<rt>ず</ruby> >> >> should just be >> >> <ruby>上<rt>じよう</rt>手<rt>ず</ruby> or <ruby>上<rt>じよう<rb>手<rt>ず</ruby> (which is easier to author and read) >> >> jukugo ruby is just mono-ruby - it's the styling that makes the >> difference, by allowing slightly more complicated overlapping than you >> would for mono-ruby. > > I understand that, but I believe that the container information also > needs to be available if you're going to style as jukugo. Hence this > model. Otherwise how can you distinguish them for styling purposes? I initially wondered the same thing, many months ago, and it was one of the main reasons I wanted to look more into the complex ruby question. But we ended up concluding that you distinguish sequences that should be handled with jukugo-styling from other sequences that are not by using a class name to apply the style. Just as you would apply other approaches to styling the position of ruby text, such as nakatsuki (centred) or katatsuki (edge aligned). Essentially, I think that what you are implying here is that use of the rb.rb.rt.rt approach automatically forces the browser to treat the ruby as juguko-styled. But you don't always want juguko-styling on words with more than one ruby text - especially in Chinese. From the JLReq doc: "Books commonly adopt kana-based jukugo-ruby for ideographic compound words. However, due to technical difficulties for rendering jukugo-ruby in machine-assisted text layout, the adoption of kana-based mono-ruby is increasing. For example, newspapers do not use jukugo-ruby, and study aids generally use mono-ruby because it is considered more important to show the readings of each ideographic character (cl-19) for students than to be concerned about the beauty of the layout." Also: "Similarly, a Japanese personal name consists of a given name and a family name, which together form a compound of a full name, and it is an editorial decision whether to attach two runs of ruby, one each for given name and family name, or to attach the full ruby text to the compound which represents the reading of the full name." So presumably if you don't want that for a particular sequence of characters you would have to revert to the rb.rt.rb.rt approach, ie. the author would have to carefully distinguish between two different ways of marking up in order to get the right styling. Tying the markup model to a specifically Japanese styling, and one that the Japanese Layout Task Force actually sees as a nice to have, doesn't seem to me to be a good idea. RI -- Richard Ishida W3C http://rishida.net/
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2013 13:32:07 UTC