JLReq TF meeting notes 2022-4-12

JLReq TF meeting notes 2022-4-12

Digital native version of JLReq - DLReq-J
Agreed (again) on the tentative and repository name - DLReq-J. Kida to discuss with Richard to create a repository.
Kida to develop a draft table of contents (TOC). Also map Bin-sensei’s text he sent on 3/10 to the TOC. At the next meeting we will discuss on the draft TOC
If the DLReq-J’s toc starts with characters and lines, we might want to put somewhere a tutorial on or considerations for designing reflow-able pages (Kobayashi). Such is also related to the universal access (kida).

Change proposal to text-spacing property default values (Murakami-san)
Murakami-san proposed a few changes to the text-spacing behaviour
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7050 <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7050>
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7055 <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/7055>
https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2462 <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/2462> (in 2018)
When two adjacent punctuations have different font sizes he recommends based on prototypes that the spacing in between should follow the preceding one (which agrees to the css draft). Taking average did not have visible benefits over additional complexity.
Will discuss under DLReq-J repository re: how we handle / reflect the proposal to DLReq-J

Simple-Ruby Working Draft updates
Remaining tasks are updating the english text based on the updated original text by Bin-sensei (shinono), plus reviewing PRs (kida).

Ruby terminologies
There was a meeting on 4/7 between Murata-san, Shimono-san, Florian and some others (fantasai and Fuqiao?). Shimono-san followed up and came up with an explainer (it is in a PR <https://github.com/himorin/jlreq/blob/english-ruby-term-explainer/docs/english-ruby-terminology/explainer.md>). Kida and Murata-san to review. Once that’s done Shimono-san to ask i18n and clreq to review it. The goal is to develop a document including necessary descriptions of ruby itself. The final form of publication TBD.
How / if we reflect it to our documents?
Newly developed documents such as simple-ruby and ruby-t2s-req roughly follow the proposal - they will be updated. css text?
For JLReq the agreement is to go with a minimal supplemental something, rather than a full update.

UAX50 proposal
Ken Lunde gathered a meeting to follow up with the proposal. Nat represented us at the meeting and provide us a report (thank you!).
Attendees are generally supportive and look forward to additional information / revised proposal from us.
Most of the pushback to the proposal came from Peter Constable from compatibility concerns for Microsoft.
Murata-san talked with Shimokawa-san, and also investigated a report by Mr. Ochiai and concluded it is hard to know EPUB sales share among EPUB readers. Agreed to test whatever we can easily get / test.
Actions
Gather endorsement from key players of various areas  such as publishers, developers, font venders, system vendors etc. (Kobayashi-san)
Obtain up to date test results. (Tajima-san to develop an EPUB/html - done)
Test Microsoft fonts / environment.
to be discussed
Do we want to explain the whole picture including remaining issues in the updated proposal?
There are characters whose behaviour are not necessarily optimal. Do we want to do anything with them? Similarly, I heard there are characters that you can’t override the behaviour using css. what are they and why? do we care?

The next meeting will be on 5/17.