W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2014

Re: [css-text] Add text-justify: inter-character back for Korean?

From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2014 15:14:26 +0100
Message-ID: <53DBA0C2.2020104@inkedblade.net>
To: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>, WWW Style <www-style@w3.org>
CC: CJK discussion <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>
On 07/26/2014 07:53 PM, Koji Ishii wrote:
> First, because this is very easy to confuse, allow me to clarify that this is a different topic from another one on this list on justification algorithm. Another one is about an algorithm when lang is unknown. This is about when lang=ko (Korean).
> Id like to propose to add text-justify: inter-character back. We removed this because at that point we assumed that lang tag can cover all the cases inter-character would do, but the feedbacks from Korean community[1][2] indicates the need for inter-character.
> There are 3 types of Korean documents:
> 1. Ideographic only, ancient documents (may sometimes contain some hangul characters.)
> 2. Mostly Hangul, a few to some ideographic characters per a paragraph or a page.
> 3. All Hangul, no ideographic characters.
> and the ratio of these documents are 1:20:80 or 10:20:70 (vary by people.)
> With this in mind, we have 4 options for documents with lang=ko:
> 1. Make both Hangul and ideographic expandable if lang=ko. Authors have to add "text-justify: inter-word to 90-99% of documents (#2 and #3.)
> 2. Make both Hangul and ideographic non-expandable if lang=ko. #1 documents cannot be justified unless we add inter-character back.
> 3. Make both Hangul and ideographic non-expandable if lang=ko. Tag #1 documents as zh.
> 4. Make Hangul non-expandable and ideographic expandable if lang=ko. Logically its strange to handle Hangul and ideographic differently, but authors dont have to add text-justify to 80% of documents (#1 and #3). 20% (#2) needs to add text-justify: inter-word.
> Option 3 is very wrong, and disliked by the Korean community[2]. Option 1 is hard to take because its likely to break a lot of existing documents on the web.

Yes, I think #1 and #3 are not acceptable.

> Both option 2 and 4 are technically possible, but to me, option 2 makes the most sense, and that option requires inter-character.

I think your logic makes sense, but I think you meant "inter-ideograph"?
"Inter-character" was an alternate name proposal for "distribute".

Another possibility is to use "distribute" for ideographic Korean, since
such documents are unlikely to contain non-CJK characters. I'm not sure
if we have reasonable behavior around punctuation for it, but that might
be fixable.

I am also wondering if we should revive the issue of renaming 'distribute'
to 'inter-character', since it seems to confuse everybody. :)

Received on Saturday, 2 August 2014 07:04:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 23 January 2023 02:14:42 UTC