Re: [css-text] Korean Hangul-only traditional layout?

I think the point is that we thought that the only “traditional documents” use “traditional layout”, but then it turned out that such documents can be translated to modern Hangul characters but still uses “traditional layout”, so what we have found is that the layout characteristic is not simply a parameter of the content for Korean.

The choice is defer supporting this case, use “distribute” (a.k.a. inter-character) if non-Asian characters would never appear in such documents, or add “inter-ideographic” back. “inter-ideographic” includes Hangul (see the Current Behavior table[1]).

[1] https://wiki.csswg.org/spec/text-justify-auto#current-behavior


/koji

> On Oct 29, 2014, at 16:32, Shinyu Murakami <murakami@vivliostyle.com> wrote:
> 
> 2014-10-28 15:18 GMT-07:00 John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>:
>> Shinyu Murakami scripsit:
>> 
>>> I think the lang attribute cannot distinguish modern and archaic, so
>>> we should use text-justify property, perhaps a new value
>>> "inter-hangul" (or better name) would be needed for archaic Hangul
>>> text.
>> 
>> If this is important, you could go to ietf-languages@iana.org and register
>> the variant subtag "pre1896" for this purpose, in which case "ko-pre1896"
>> would become a valid BCP 47 language tag.
> 
> In my understanding, the main target of CSS standards is today's web
> and digital publishing, so the "pre1896" hangul text would not be high
> on the priority.
> 
> In most cases, 'text-justify: inter-character' would be sufficient for
> old Korean text, and when Latin characters are mixed and
> "inter-character" is not expected for that span, such markup should be
> specified.
> The "inter-hangul" behaviour would be better for "pre1896" hangul
> text, but I don't think it necessary for Level 3 of CSS Text (maybe,
> L4).
> 
> Shinyu Murakami
> http://vivliostyle.com

> murakami@vivliostyle.com

Received on Wednesday, 29 October 2014 08:36:53 UTC