https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=28265 --- Comment #26 from David Singer <singer@apple.com> --- comment copied from GitHub: After asking experts, I believe we have the following state: <ruby> and <rt>: are in the specification now <rb>: is in by implication (it's a normal part of <ruby> if I understand it correctly), but we should be explicit <rtc>: might be needed for some cases; should we include it? I am not aware of need, myself. <rp>: is only in HTML for backwards compatibility and is not needed. Can we mention <rt> as being part of <ruby> and leave <rtc> for implementer discretion and the future? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.Received on Wednesday, 16 November 2016 23:10:15 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:41:11 UTC