W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > October to December 2015

Re: [css-text-decor] Default UA stylesheet for emphasis marks

From: Xidorn Quan <quanxunzhen@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 09:52:49 +1100
Message-ID: <CAMdq699oRXGe4jVvfgz4Jh604OMXAeFSo11U4miLw2rtL+W2wg@mail.gmail.com>
To: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, WWW International <www-international@w3.org>, CJK discussion <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>
On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 9:04 AM, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote:
> On 11/24/2015 12:28 AM, Xidorn Quan wrote:
>> There is currently only one language-specific style rule in the
>> default UA stylesheet for emphasis marks:
>>> :root:lang(zh), [lang|=zh] {
>>> /* default emphasis mark position is 'under right' for Chinese */
>>>    text-emphasis-position: under right;
>>> }
>> I think we should have another one at least for ja, otherwise Japanese
>> text embeded inside Chinese text would have undesired result.
>> Probably something like:
>>> :root:lang(ja), [lang|=ja] {
>>> /* default emphasis mark position is 'over right' for Japanese */
>>>    text-emphasis-position: over right;
>>> }
> I think this makes sense, though I'd like to double-check with i18n
> if indeed embedded text should swap sides on the emphasis marks.
> (It probably does; I know underlines do, when swapping Japanese to
> English within a paragraph.) I can add it to the spec for now, though,
> and update if we hear back otherwise.
> I think the full set of rules should be
>   :root:lang(zh), [lang|=zh] { text-emphasis-position: under right; }
>   [lang|=ja]                 { text-emphasis-position: over right; }
> Does that seem right? [Given 'over right' is the initial value, the
> :root selector is not necessary for Japanese.]

It looks right, and yes I agree we don't need :root here. One more
thing that, in the table "Preferred emphasis mark and ruby position",
it seems Mongolian also uses 'over right', I suppose we probably
should also add "[lang|=mn]" there?

> I'm also curious, do we need a similar rule for Korean?

I don't see anything from KLReq (which could be in its early stage,
though). But I have no idea about Korean anyway.

- Xidorn
Received on Tuesday, 24 November 2015 22:54:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:41:09 UTC