W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > August 2007

[whatwg] My case for Ruby-elements

From: Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 00:29:54 +0700
Message-ID: <001301c7de98$bb765c40$6701a8c0@Junk>
Michel Fortin wrote:
> Le 2007-08-13 ? 12:25, Kri?tof ?elechovski a ?crit :
> > The text is not interlaced but it is vertically 
> > synchronized in order that you can know which passage
> > in your language corresponds to which passage in the
> > other language..
> I don't think Ruby markup to be appropriate here. But I can 
> see how reading effectively such a document could be 
> difficult on a screen reader.

Like Michel said, Ruby markup isn't appropriate for this use case. Ruby text is designed to be used to provide pronunciation and disambiguation cues for logographic languages, especially Japanese and Chinese. If you are not dealing with a logographic language, then generally Ruby annotations are not for you.

Phoneme-by-phoneme or word-for-word transliterations (e.g. Latin transliteration of Thai words) might also be an appropriate use for Ruby text. But, translations and transliterations that are not word-for-word are not what Ruby markup is designed for.

Received on Tuesday, 14 August 2007 10:29:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:57 UTC