xfq: Makoto-san talked about accessiblilty of Ruby in TPAC
… slides: https://1drv.ms/p/s!An5Z79wj5AZBgqUIlh2vtsqXfyjNZg?e=BdYdli
Eric: Chinese doesn't have the 交ぜ書き issue
… Japanese has this requirement
… for example, it can be used in digital textbooks
… show kana for a "fourth grade" kanji to a student still in the third grade
xfq: jlreq people plan to use a few meetings to go through jlreq sections to review if CSS is defined for requested features
… do you think this is something useful for us clreq too?
Eric: jlreq is relatively complete
… clreq is not that complete
… we can still work on it, though
… the structure of clreq and jlreq is similar, so we can also refer to their work
… it is helpful for web developers
xfq: also useful for browser vendors
… it can make more web developers be aware of new CSS features related to Chinese layout
… for example, even some veteran web developers have never heard of HTML Ruby
Bobby: we didn't discuss this during the Kyoto meeting (of jlreq), though
Eric: Tajima-san did some work in this area
… http://densyodamasii.com/?p=3222
Bobby: we can write a "how to implement clreq" guide for web developers
… what do you think, Huijing?
huijing: some Chinese layout related CSS features are already in CSS specs
… just not implemented, or implemented incorrectly
… the current CSS can already implement most of clreq
[Eric walks through Tajima-san's "JLREQとCSS"]
huijing: this document looks useful
Eric: now we have consensus that we should work on a document like this
… what should we call it?
… clreq and CSS implementation status?
Bobby: it does not sounds like a gap analysis to me
huijing: CSS implementation status
Bobby: is the Chinese Text Layout Task Force out of the charter?
xfq: we can extend the charter without going through the AC review
Eric: a lot of CSS people don't know clreq
… so we should let them know, not only let them to find us
huijing: I agree
… I often use CSS Writing Modes as an example CSS feature in talks
… let more non East Asian people know this feature
Eric: Through reviewing CSS definition status, we can also find out what we didn't write in detail in clreq
… it helps both CSS and clreq, and promotes communication among CSS and clreq people
Bobby: is there any good tool to do Web annotation?
xfq: add annotation to clreq?
Bobby: yes
xfq: I don't know
Eric: we can use the structure used by Tajima-san
… we need an initial draft first
… don't need to translate Tajima-san's text
… just reuse this structure
Bobby: what about using a table?
Eric: table doesn't seem to be very convenient
xfq: I agree with Eric
Bobby: https://web.hypothes.is/publishing/
… anyone tried this before?
Eric: this doesn't seem to be an efficient way to collaborate to me
… and the final format need to be an HTML file
… it corresponds to clreq, section to section
Bobby: or use Google Docs
Eric: or Markdown
… but I don't like using big table(s)
Bobby: OK
… I'll try to draft an initial version before mid-November
xfq: I can add this in the agenda of the next meeting
Eric: so what should we call this?
… what does jlreq people call it?
xfq: Gap Analysis: Review of CSS definition status
huijing: why "definition status", not "implementation status"?
xfq: some requirements are not in CSS specs; some already in CSS specs, but not implemented or implemented incorrectly
Eric: we need definition in CSS first
… implementation is the next step
… the name "CSS definition status" sounds good to me
https://github.com/w3c/clreq/issues
https://github.com/w3c/clreq/issues/230
xfq: 770 combinations of the text-spacing property of CSS are currently allowed
… which is very complicated
… CSSWG needs to understand which combinations are useful and which ones are not
… we can look into this, as a homework
Eric: we can probably classify the values as commonly used ones and not commonly used ones
… currently the text-spacing property is mostly Japanese-oriented
… it's complex because requirements of Japanese layout is complex
Bobby: ideograph-alpha and ideograph-numeric are very useful
Eric: all of the single values are useful
… we should look at the combinations
huijing: agreed
… which ones in the 770 combinations won't appear
Bobby: it's hard to say which ones *won't* appear
xfq: we can say which ones are useful and important at least
Bobby: Traditional Chinese and Simplified Chinese are different
Eric: currently the text-spacing property is mostly Japanese-oriented, and the convention of Japanese is more similar to Simplified Chinese than Traditional Chinese
Bobby: I remember Myles mentioned 1/4em extra spacing between runs of ideographs and non-ideographic glyphs is too much
… he prefers 1/8em
xfq: for example, 'space-first allow-end trim-adjacent' looks like a useful combination
[xfq explains 'space-first allow-end trim-adjacent']
xfq: we can make it homework for next call
Eric: Bobby can have a look at https://drafts.csswg.org/css-text-4/#fullwidth-collapsing
… it's mostly for Japan and Mainland China
… probably bad for center-aligned punctuation marks used in Taiwan and Hong Kong
Bobby: I prefers not trimming
Eric: but you still need to define the behavior when people do use 'trim-adjacent' in their CSS
Bobby: there are different conventions
Eric: we can recommend a convention
… Adobe InDesign has similar issues
Bobby: https://www.cns11643.gov.tw/wordView.jsp?ID=74070
… CNS 11643 example ^
https://github.com/w3c/clreq/issues/229
xfq: CSS folks need some advice on the above counter styles and whether they should be cyclic, fixed or something else
Eric: should we create a new class?
… what does iroha use?
xfq: alphabetic
https://w3c.github.io/predefined-counter-styles/#hiragana-iroha
Bobby: I think it should be cyclic
Eric: first ten counters are '甲' '乙' '丙' '丁' '戊' '己' '庚' '辛' '壬' '癸'
… what about the 11th one?
… we can think about it more and comment on the issue
https://github.com/w3c/clreq/issues/228
Eric: can't resolve on this today
… can look at it as homework