- From: Nikita Popov <privat@ni-po.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 11:10:59 +0100
Futomi Hatano schrieb: > If ATs(e.g. screen reader) know the rp element, it can remove the content of the rp element. > So, we can get only true annotations from ATs, without parentheses. > I don't want hear parentheses from a screen reader. > > I hope that all browsers (including ATs) support the ruby element. > If so, I think the rp element is not necessary. > > Thank you. > > -- > Futomi Hatano > www.html5.jp > > I think this element is necessary in the HTML5 spec. Talking about screen-readers: How should a screen-reader actually handle ruby annotations? In this case <ruby> ? <rt> ?? </rt> ? <rt> ?? </rt> </ruby> it would be quite strange if a screen-reader read the annotations, because they have the same content as the ruby base text. (I hope this is correct. I don't know the Japanese language, but I understood it as ? beeing same as ?? only in a different "way" of writing.) So the reader must not read the annotation. In an example i got from an older W3C spec, it's different: <ruby> <rbc> <rb>10</rb> <rb>31</rb> <rb>2002</rb> </rbc> <rtc> <rt>Month</rt> <rt>Day</rt> <rt>Year</rt> </rtc> <rtc> <rt rbspan="3">Expiration Date</rt> </rtc> </ruby> As this markup isn't used anymore with HTML5, here's how it would be (dropping the "expiration date"): <ruby> 10 <rt>Month</rt> 31 <rt>Day</rt> 2002 <rt>Year</rt> </ruby> This one now should be read out by the screen-reader. Otherwise the meaning of the numbers may be not as clear. (Or is the date-example out-of-date and ruby shouldn't be used there?)
Received on Friday, 30 October 2009 03:10:59 UTC