- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2013 22:59:24 -0800
- To: MURAKAMI Shinyu <murakami@antenna.co.jp>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, CJK discussion <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>, 'WWW International' <www-international@w3.org>
On 02/03/2013 09:33 AM, MURAKAMI Shinyu wrote: > fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote on 2013/02/03 5:54:29 >> >> OK. So, there are several things we could do with the spec, which of these do >> you recommend? >> >> Question 1: >> >> Should we remove allowing to hide ruby when emphasis marks are present? >> a) yes >> b) no > > a) yes. > > The ruby text is a part of the document content and the emphasis marks > are a style. Dropping content text is worse than dropping styles. > >> >> Question 2: >> >> What should the spec say wrt emphasis mark position when ruby is present? >> >> a) Require placing emphasis marks as close as possible to base text >> (Antenna House default behavior) >> [...] > > a) > > There are both cases, but a) is simpler and if we leave this undefined, > we lose interoperability. Thanks for your feedback, Murakami-san! We updated the spec to require the behavior in AH. http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-text-decor-3/#text-emphasis-position-property We also added examples showing how emphasis marks or ruby can be hidden when they conflict using additional style rules, if that is what the author wants. ~fantasai
Received on Wednesday, 6 March 2013 06:59:53 UTC