- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 12:30:22 +0900
- To: ishida@w3.org
- Cc: www-i18n-comments@w3.org, public-i18n-core@w3.org, public-i18n-its@w3.org
Hello i18n core, This is a reply on behalf of the i18n ITS working group. See also http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3506 for our discussion. Thank you very much for your comment. We agreed to implement it. Please have a look at http://www.w3.org/International/its/itstagset/itstagset.html#ruby-implementation , especially example 36. Please let us know within 2 weeks if you are satisfied. If we don't hear from you , we will assume this issue as closed. Regards, Felix ishida@w3.org wrote: > Comment from the i18n review of: > http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-its-20060518/ > > Comment 36 > At http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/0606-its/ > Editorial/substantive: E > Owner: RI > > Location in reviewed document: > 6.6.3 > > Comment: > It is very poorly explained what the difference is between this and the situation described in the last para of 6.6.2. > > > How about: > > > "Where legacy formats do no contain ruby markup conformant to [Ruby-TR], it is still possible to associate ruby text with a specified range of document content using the rubyRule element." > > > Note also s/and there one wants/and where one wants/ > > > >
Received on Monday, 11 September 2006 03:30:42 UTC