- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 18:38:14 -0700
- To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Cc: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>, W3C Style <www-style@w3.org>, www International <www-international@w3.org>
On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:36 AM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: > It's not, see Koji's reply. Jukugo and the sort of collapsing I'm > describing for Latin phonetics are not the same. > > We basically need three values, in order of priority, for ruby-merge: > > 1. syllable ruby (don't overlap adjacent bases) > 2. jukugo ruby (separate if space, allow overlap within word if not) > 3. word ruby (collapse annotations within a word) > > The mapping in the spec is currently > > 1. ruby-merge: separate > 2. ruby-merge: auto > 3. ruby-merge: collapse > > We could use different words to describe these values, and/or rename > the property, but we have all the definitions needed currently, afaict. Hmm, I see. I was under the impression that jukugo was the "word" mode; I didn't realize it was actually "mono, but allow overlap if necessary". I definitely see how the "word" mode is necessary for ruby usage in any other language. Different keywords would be good, then, because "auto" doesn't suggest jukugo. I'll think on this a bit. ~TJ
Received on Friday, 2 October 2015 01:39:03 UTC