Re: i18n WG position on Issue-172 "restore <rb> as an optional element"

On 02/09/2012 11:15 PM, Richard Ishida wrote:
> The Internationalization Working Group is aware that the call for Change
> Proposals for Issue-172 "restore <rb> as an optional element" [1] will
> close on 11th February.
>
> Discussions have been taking place about how best to move forward with
> regards to ruby in html5, but more time is needed to finalize those
> discussions so that a widely acceptable recommendation can be made as to
> how to proceed.
>
> The Internationalization Working Group will therefore not formally pursue the issue further at this time. In particular, the
> Internationalization Working Group will not submit or endorse any change proposal for issue-172 at this time, and asks that
> other interested parties consider not pursuing this issue further at this time, so that this issue can be closed without
> prejudice for now and re-opened later if necessary.
>
> The Internationalization Working Group absolutely remains committed to working further, together with vendor representatives
> and other interested parties, to get agreement about out how <ruby>, including <rb>, should be implemented, and is taking
> steps to move that forward.

I think it's nonetheless important to address
   https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13113
which requests changes in the parsing algorithm to not preclude
the ability to parse more complex ruby markup in the future.

~fantasai

Received on Sunday, 12 February 2012 00:18:04 UTC