Allow Ruby use in non-CJKM languages #145
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
✅ Deploy Preview for bp-i18n-specdev ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration. |
aphillips
requested changes
Oct 31, 2024
| @@ -3794,7 +3794,7 @@ <h3>Ruby text annotations</h3> | |||
| <p class="advisement">Ruby implementations should allow annotations to appear on either or both sides of the base text.</p> | |||
| </div> | |||
| <div class="req" id="ruby_cjk"> | |||
| <p class="advisement">Ruby markup in HTML is designed specifically for Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and Mongolian requirements, and should not be used as a general glossing mechanism.</p> | |||
| <p class="advisement">Ruby markup in HTML is designed primarily for Chinese, <a data-cite="jlreq#usage_of_ruby">Japanese</a>, Korean, and Mongolian requirements, and the needs of those languages should be prioritized in any use of the Ruby elements in other specifications. Within that constraint, Ruby may be used to associate annotations with a base string of text.</p> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The I18N WG discussed this in our 2024-10-31 teleconference. We don't quite agree with the changes proposed here. This is not because other annotation uses for Ruby do not exist in the wild, but that they are rare, usually can be better handled using other markup mechanisms, and because novel uses of Ruby conflict with their intended use. In addition, bear in mind that this document is guidance to specification authors and we seek to guide the audience the best we can.
Perhaps consider a modification like the following?
Suggested change
| <p class="advisement">Ruby markup in HTML is designed primarily for Chinese, <a data-cite="jlreq#usage_of_ruby">Japanese</a>, Korean, and Mongolian requirements, and the needs of those languages should be prioritized in any use of the Ruby elements in other specifications. Within that constraint, Ruby may be used to associate annotations with a base string of text.</p> | |
| <p class="advisement">Ruby markup in HTML is designed primarily for Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and Mongolian requirements. Annotation in other languages SHOULD use other mechanisms. Specifications SHOULD avoid proposing new uses for Ruby markup.</p> | |
| <p class="note">For examples of other types of annotation markup available in HTML, see <a href="https://r12a.github.io/blog/201708.html#20190304">post on Richard Ishida's blog </a>.</p> |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Based on the range of Japanese semantics for Ruby that are described in w3c/ruby-t2s-req#34, it doesn't make sense to say that Ruby is specifically useful for only 4 languages. If other specifications have a need within that range of semantics, they should reach for Ruby instead of inventing their own elements.
It wasn't clear to me what the difference is between a "general" glossing mechanism and the kinds of glosses that are in active use in Japanese, but if there is a distinction I'm missing, which needs to constrain uses in other specs, I'd be fine describing it here.
Preview | Diff