W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > October to December 2016

[csswg-drafts] Issue: [css-ruby-1] Default styling for chinese annotations marked as i18n-comment

From: r12a via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2016 16:52:37 +0000
To: www-international@w3.org
Message-ID: <issues.labeled-192400268-None-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
r12a has just labeled an issue for https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts
 as "i18n-comment":

== [css-ruby-1] Default styling for chinese annotations ==
 A.1 Supporting Ruby Layout
https://drafts.csswg.org/css-ruby-1/#default-ua-ruby

the default UA style sheet information includes the following:

```
rtc:lang(zh), rt:lang(zh) {
  ruby-align: center; }
rtc:lang(zh-TW), :not(rtc) > rt:lang(zh-TW) {
  font-size: 30%; }               /* bopomofo */
```

This indicates that all Chinese ruby should implement 
`ruby-align:center` as the default, rather than that declared in the 
spec, which is `space-around`.  As clreq mentions centered as standard
 for pinyin as well as bopomofo, think this merits at least a note in 
the spec text, rather than just being hidden away in this appendix – 
especially given that most ruby will be either Japanese or Chinese.

However, the font-size applied to zh-TW of 30% is likely to be 
problematic, and I'm inclined to think that this shouldn't be in the 
spec, or if it is, you should draw a little more attention to it so 
that people wanting to use pinyin with trad chinese are aware that 
they need to change the font-size setting. Also:
1. traditional chinese with bopomofo may be labelled as zh-Hant
3. given that the browser/font has to be involved in positioning the 
bopomofo annotations, and that  centring shouldn't apply to the tone 
marks, perhaps the centring and possibly also the sizing isn't 
actually needed as a default for bopomofo.  As it is, such a default 
doesn't actually help unless the browser/font can go the remainder of 
the way towards representing bopomofo annotations, so it seems 
redundant in the default stylesheet.

(i think we may have started this discussion before, but i couldn't 
find it in the cosmic chaos that preceded the advent of github. I 
don't think we concluded it anyway.)


See https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/775
Received on Thursday, 8 December 2016 16:52:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:41:11 UTC