I feel a lot less embarrassed about not finding that bug number now that I know
how long this thread has been running. :)
Eric Shepherd
Developer Documentation Lead
Mozilla
http://www.bitstampede.com/
On Dec 30, 2014, at 12:25 PM, L. David Baron dba...@dbaron.org wrote:
From the message at
Is there a bug for the changes being discussed here, and is it marked with
dev-doc-needed? Sounds like there will be, at a minimum, a few tweaks to the
discussion about how this stuff works.
Thanks!
Eric Shepherd
Developer Documentation Lead
Mozilla
http://www.bitstampede.com/
On Dec 27,
On Tuesday 2014-12-30 12:14 -0500, Eric Shepherd wrote:
Is there a bug for the changes being discussed here, and is it marked with
dev-doc-needed? Sounds like there will be, at a minimum, a few tweaks to the
discussion about how this stuff works.
From the message at the start of the thread
Xidorn Quan quanxunz...@gmail.com, 2014-12-27 10:12 +1100:
On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 12:23 AM, Michael[tm] Smith m...@w3.org wrote:
...
Xidorn Quan quanxunz...@gmail.com, 2014-12-26 04:41 -0800:
...
The difference in expression ability becomes more important when there
are words mixed
On 2014/12/28 3:04, Michael[tm] Smith wrote:
Further, I don't know of any typical case where if a base character
is kana, why you'd ever want to display furigana/yomigana for it.
Ruby is not used only for furigana/yomigana. I know one example from a
very popular Japanese novel:
On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 5:04 AM, Michael[tm] Smith m...@w3.org wrote:
Xidorn Quan quanxunz...@gmail.com, 2014-12-27 10:12 +1100:
On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 12:23 AM, Michael[tm] Smith m...@w3.org wrote:
...
Xidorn Quan quanxunz...@gmail.com, 2014-12-26 04:41 -0800:
...
The difference
On Sunday 2014-12-28 03:04 +0900, Michael[tm] Smith wrote:
So as long as the spec is going to require UAs to resort to magic behavior,
I think the magic could instead just be autohide any ruby annotations for
kana characters. And then you could just have simpler markup like this:
On Tuesday, July 8, 2014 3:34:50 AM UTC+10, ian.h...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, July 1, 2014 12:58:45 PM UTC-7, Koji Ishii wrote:
Summary:
Two recent HTML changes improve ruby support:
1) Addition of the rb and rtc elements (but not rbc); and
2) Matching update to the tag
Hi Xidorn,
Xidorn Quan quanxunz...@gmail.com, 2014-12-26 04:41 -0800:
...
If you want the word 明朝体 to be marked in ruby in separate form, with
the WHATWG rules, you must write it as:
ruby明rtみん/rt朝rtちょう/rt体rtたい/rt/ruby
It is incompatible with the inline form, which means, if an author
On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 12:23 AM, Michael[tm] Smith m...@w3.org wrote:
Hi Xidorn,
Xidorn Quan quanxunz...@gmail.com, 2014-12-26 04:41 -0800:
...
If you want the word 明朝体 to be marked in ruby in separate form, with
the WHATWG rules, you must write it as:
On Tuesday, July 1, 2014 12:58:45 PM UTC-7, Koji Ishii wrote:
Summary:
Two recent HTML changes improve ruby support:
1) Addition of the rb and rtc elements (but not rbc); and
2) Matching update to the tag omission rules to make ruby authoring easier.
By implementing these changes,
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 10:58 PM, Koji Ishii kojii...@gluesoft.co.jp wrote:
Platform coverage: all platforms (parsing only, layout will be in separate
intents)
The parsing change is the easy part. Is there a plan to get the layout
part implemented?
My general take on this issue is:
1) As far
On 02/07/14 17:05, Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 10:58 PM, Koji Ishii kojii...@gluesoft.co.jp wrote:
Platform coverage: all platforms (parsing only, layout will be in separate
intents)
The parsing change is the easy part. Is there a plan to get the layout
part implemented?
My
On Wednesday 2014-07-02 10:05 +0300, Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 10:58 PM, Koji Ishii kojii...@gluesoft.co.jp wrote:
Platform coverage: all platforms (parsing only, layout will be in separate
intents)
The parsing change is the easy part. Is there a plan to get the layout
Summary:
Two recent HTML changes improve ruby support:
1) Addition of the rb and rtc elements (but not rbc); and
2) Matching update to the tag omission rules to make ruby authoring easier.
By implementing these changes, Gecko supports the parsing side of all the ruby
use cases required for the
15 matches
Mail list logo
