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

Re: [css-ruby] About side of additional leading

From: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 19:26:21 +0900
Message-ID: <CAN9ydbVxuR1eb1d+ZRx22urVzdE+C1EymrUNyF2+fjDfouBiHw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Xidorn Quan <quanxunzhen@gmail.com>
Cc: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
Thanks for the reply. Let me confirm if we differ or not.

When the ruby is on single side, I think we're on the same page.

When the ruby is on both sides, and when both ruby are the same height,
we're still on the same page.

When the ruby is on both sides, but the two ruby are in different height,
you'd like to add max of the two heights to both sides, while I said adding
the height for each side is better.

Is my understanding correct? I'm not sure if I read your algorithm 3
correctly or not.

/koji

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 7:08 AM, Xidorn Quan <quanxunzhen@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 6:37 PM, Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Given this spacing algorithm was born to switch line-stacking-ruby[1]
>> automatically, it looks more natural to me to add leading only as much
>> as needed for the side.
>>
>> But having much different sizes of ruby on both sides are so rare that
>> I'd like to take implementer's preference over what theoretically
>> looks more natural to me.
>>
>> Xidorn, do you prefer the way in your pending patch?
>>
>
> I'm not sure what theoretically looks more natural to you. My current impl
> does add leading only as much as needed for the side, if annotations are on
> only one side. And you didn't mention anything about your preference on
> both side cases.
>
> I think my impl looks good to me, but if you have any suggestion looks
> more reasonable, I'm happy to implement that as well.
>
> - Xidorn
>
Received on Monday, 12 January 2015 10:26:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:50 UTC