W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org > April 2013

Re: ITS2 ruby issue i18n-ISSUE-210, i18n-ISSUE-215

From: Norbert Lindenberg <w3@norbertlindenberg.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 09:53:19 -0700
Cc: Norbert Lindenberg <w3@norbertlindenberg.com>, www-international <www-international@w3.org>, "public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org" <public-multilingualweb-lt-comments@w3.org>
Message-Id: <195286A9-D2E0-40D1-B23C-6096EC3417C1@norbertlindenberg.com>
To: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
I still think this section should be removed entirely, since it adds no value to the standard in its current form. It might be useful to explain in an appendix why it's been removed, and that it may reappear in a later version.


On Apr 8, 2013, at 8:52 , Felix Sasaki wrote:

> Hi i18n colleagues,
> this issue
> https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/87
> "whitespace change in ruby example" is done, see
> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#EX-ruby-implementation-1
> I was wondering how to move forward with this issue
> https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/91
> "parts of the ruby section should be removed"
> We had various discussions about this in the i18n WG. From these I see two options:
> 1) remove the section completely
> 2) keep the section but have it *mostly* (see below) empty, saying "the ruby model in HTML5 is in flux. The ruby section may be updated in a subsequent version of ITS".
> The original comment
> https://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/track/issues/91
> said that the local part of the ruby section should be removed. But with that, all that would be left is this sentence in the "definition" section:
> "The Ruby data category is used for a run of text that is associated with another run of text, referred to as the base text. Ruby text is used to provide a short annotation of the associated base text. It is most often used to provide a reading (pronunciation) guide."
> We could keep that sentence also as part of resolution aproach 2).
> The global ruby section
> is like local ruby specific to XHTML, see the names of the "pointer" attributes at
> http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/drafts/its20/its20.html#ruby-global
> so it might be rather confusing to keep the global approach. Besides, since ITS1, it seems there has been nobody implementing ruby globally.
> Best,
> Felix
Received on Tuesday, 9 April 2013 16:53:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:32:27 UTC