Hello.

*Some ruby WPTs seem to be failing, is that expected? (including one 
overhang-spaces).*
ruby-overhang-spaces-vertical-003.html 
<https://wpt.fyi/results/css/css-ruby/ruby-overhang-spaces-vertical-003.html?label=master&label=experimental&product=chrome&product=edge&aligned&q=ruby-overhang-*>
 seems 
to be failing in WPT environment, and it passed in Chromium LUCI 
<https://ci.chromium.org/ui/p/chromium/builders/try/linux-rel/2685976> and 
my local.
Here is the test result image of WPT: 
https://wpt.fyi/analyzer?screenshot=sha1%3A3fad62423ed1bbf8d08f84840a83d6d3d26332a5&screenshot=sha1%3Ac50e853a8303915e1e6da5dd13351aba6a2ee92d
The result seems orange and blue lines are aligned as expected, but あ character 
in the ruby base has 1px difference. I'm not sure why this difference 
occurs..
Is it okay to add <meta name="fuzzy" content="maxDifference=0-255; 
totalPixels=0-160"> for this test?

*is it still the case that WebKit is shipping an implementation of this, or 
is it shipping a different set of keywords?*
It's shipping a different set of keywords. WebKit shipped for "auto" and 
"none". And the updated set of keywords contain "auto", "spaces" and "none" 
(alias of "spaces" for legacy support).
I think the standard position is needed, so I've created 
https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/681.

Thank you.

2026년 6월 4일 목요일 오전 12시 6분 58초 UTC+9에 [email protected]님이 작성:

> Hey,
>
> Thanks for the update! Some ruby WPTs seem to be failing, is that 
> expected? (including one overhang-spaces). 
>
> Also a question about the WebKit status: since the CSSWG changed the 
> syntax a little bit, is it still the case that WebKit is shipping an 
> implementation of this, or is it shipping a different set of keywords?
>
> Thanks,
> Vlad
>
> On Wednesday, May 27, 2026 at 6:32:07 PM UTC-4 [email protected] wrote:
>
>> Hello.
>>
>> Yes, I updated both in these patches, per the CSSWG resolution.
>> - 7805625: [ruby-overhang] Support for parsing and serialization for 
>> 'spaces' | 
>> https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/7805625
>> - 7809406: [ruby-overhang] Support overhang for space, NBSP, other space 
>> separator | 
>> https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/7809406
>> - 7839338: [ruby-overhang] Fix ruby-overhang-spaces-011-ref.html WPT | 
>> https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/7839338
>> - 7809475: [ruby-overhang] Support overhang for full-width 
>> open/close/middle dot | 
>> https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/7809475
>>
>> Added WPTs: "ruby-overhang-spaces-*" files in 
>> https://wpt.fyi/results/css/css-ruby
>>
>> Thank you.
>> Minseong Kim
>>
>> 2026년 5월 28일 목요일 오전 12시 6분 56초 UTC+9에 [email protected]님이 작성:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I saw the API Owners chip was changed to "review_requested", but without 
>>> any additional context. Are the WPTs and implementation updated per the 
>>> CSSWG resolution?
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>> Mike
>>> On 4/8/26 10:31 p.m., Minseong Kim wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello. 
>>>
>>> I missed to share the issue link of mozilla position I created.
>>> https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1372
>>>
>>> Thank you!
>>>
>>> 2026년 4월 9일 목요일 AM 12시 7분 24초 UTC+9에 [email protected]님이 작성:
>>>
>>>> Hey, 
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for following up. Please let us know when the WPT and 
>>>> implementation are updated and we will review.
>>>>
>>>> Also, just as a reminder, I think the mozilla position is still 
>>>> outstanding (from Mike's comment above). Could you please file one at  
>>>> https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions and reference it here?
>>>>
>>>> Thank you
>>>> Vlad
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, April 6, 2026 at 10:15:15 AM UTC-4 [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Following the recent CSSWG resolution 
>>>>> <https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5912#issuecomment-4180375625>,
>>>>>  
>>>>> I'm updating this to include the new `spaces` value and designate `none` 
>>>>> as 
>>>>> its alias. This change allows ruby to overhang whitespace and CJK 
>>>>> punctuation even when none is specified, preventing unnecessary layout 
>>>>> gaps. I'll update the implementation and WPT to align with this behavior.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for all!
>>>>>
>>>>> 2026년 3월 19일 목요일 AM 12시 22분 24초 UTC+9에 Chris Harrelson님이 작성:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I see that CSSWG issue 5912 has been added to an agenda. Let's wait 
>>>>>> to see what the CSSWG decides.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 5:07 AM Mike Taylor <[email protected]> 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 3/17/26 5:48 a.m., Minseong Kim wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thank you all for the reviews.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Can we request a signal?*
>>>>>>> I've found the opened issue in bugzilla 
>>>>>>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1611410. I updated 
>>>>>>> Firefox's signal field to "positive, with bugzilla link" in the 
>>>>>>> chromestatus.com entry.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thank you for finding that!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Per 
>>>>>>> https://www.chromium.org/blink/launching-features/wide-review/#signal-process,
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> an open bugs doesn't qualify as Positive. Mind filing an issue at 
>>>>>>> https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions to request an 
>>>>>>> official position? Apologies for not being more clear in my original 
>>>>>>> request.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *1) Has the W3C i18n WG reviewed this, and what do they think?* 
>>>>>>> Yes, they reviewed this on 
>>>>>>> https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/4492 discussion. They 
>>>>>>> supported this addition to address specific cultural and accessibility 
>>>>>>> requirements. But, after that, frivoal@ proposed "ruby-overhang:none is 
>>>>>>> too 
>>>>>>> aggressive" on https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/5912.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2) Can the browser just do a better job of applying the 'auto' 
>>>>>>> value, so that authors don't have to manually fix errors with 'none'?
>>>>>>> While browsers strive to improve auto behavior, none is a specific 
>>>>>>> requirement for educational and accessibility contexts. For example, in 
>>>>>>> children's books or textbooks for low-vision readers, authors need to 
>>>>>>> ensure none overhang to prevent any reading confusion, even if the UA 
>>>>>>> thinks the overhang is safe. So, I updated the motivation field in 
>>>>>>> chromestatus entry.
>>>>>>> 2026년 3월 17일 화요일 AM 10시 43분 12초 UTC+9에 [email protected]님이 작성:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 16, 2026 at 5:47 PM 'Jeffrey Yasskin' via blink-dev <
>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1) Has the W3C i18n WG reviewed this, and what do they think?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It might also be worth asking about the state of review from the 
>>>>>>>> Japanese 
>>>>>>>> Language Enablement <https://github.com/w3c/jlreq/> and Chinese 
>>>>>>>> Language Enablement <https://w3c.github.io/clreq/home> task forces.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -David
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>>>>> Groups "blink-dev" group.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, 
>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> To view this discussion visit 
>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/944936c7-5490-49b7-9a22-32cbb76fc3ea%40chromium.org
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/944936c7-5490-49b7-9a22-32cbb76fc3ea%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/000a2c0b-da08-493a-89d0-7f707fd50340n%40chromium.org.

Reply via email to