W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2015

Re: [css-ruby] Tone mark of bopomofo in ruby

From: Bobby Tung <bobbytung@wanderer.tw>
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2015 00:38:15 +0800
Cc: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>, Xidorn Quan <quanxunzhen@gmail.com>, Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, CJK discussion <public-i18n-cjk@w3.org>
Message-Id: <D12A5DA9-6A1A-492B-83EE-ACFBD04AC668@wanderer.tw>
To: Jonathan Kew <jfkthame@gmail.com>

I don't what you do not agree with.

In Print and plain text conversion, light tone usually placed before bopomofo character like: ˙ㄧㄚ just like what your example shown.

1. <ruby>呀<rt>ㄧㄚ˙</rt></ruby>

2. <ruby>呀<rt>˙ㄧㄚ</rt></ruby>

I think authors should mark bopomofo and light tone as 2.  And browser do nothing to reorder.

Bobby Tung

> Jonathan Kew <jfkthame@gmail.com> 於 2015年2月4日 上午12:19 寫道:
> On 3/2/15 15:20, Bobby Tung wrote:
>>> 1. Do you want browsers to re-order the light tone marks, or do you
>>> think it should be done in the source HTML files?
>> No, browser just do nothing, it should be done in the source HTML files.
> I don't think I agree with this. As far as I understand, the established convention users are accustomed to is that the light tone mark precedes the bopomofo characters, as exemplified by existing input method software, and by text currently on the web.[1]
> Requiring a different encoding order in HTML files than the existing plain-text convention seems wrong to me. If the author of [1], for example, wanted to change the page to use HTML/CSS ruby instead of inline 「quoted」 bopomofo readings, (s)he should be able to do that by simply replacing the quoting brackets with ruby markup; the actual character sequence representing each syllable's reading should not need to be rearranged.
> Rendering the light tone mark, encoded *before* the syllable (because that is the established spelling convention) in the proper place relative to the bopomofo letters, depending on the writing mode and ruby position chosen, should be the responsibility of the browser in cooperation with the font.
> To what extent the browser should rely on font technologies, and to what extent it needs to perform special layout itself, may still be an open question. But we should not be expecting authors (or authoring tools) to reorder the characters from their conventional sequence.
> JK
> [1] For example, see http://blog.xuite.net/suin1023/blog/55774766-%E3%80%8C%E4%B8%80%E5%80%8B%E5%80%8B%E3%80%8D%E6%98%AF%E3%80%8C%CB%99%E3%84%8D%E3%84%9C%E3%80%8D%E9%82%84%E6%98%AF%E3%80%8C%E3%84%8D%E3%84%9C%CB%8B%E3%80%8D where the writer includes a number of bopomofo readings, and consistently marks the light tone before the syllable, but the other tones after it.
Received on Tuesday, 3 February 2015 16:38:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:51 UTC