Clreq Editors' Call

08 April 2020


Eric, huijing, xfq

Meeting minutes

Go through the pull request list



xfq: I think we can merge this

huijing: OK


xfq: I added reduced inter-character spacing to the Glossary in this PR
… it is mentioned in the main text, but not in the Glossary


Eric: We can add it indeed, since it's mentioned in the main text
… but it's not common (compared to Japanese)
… sometimes there is only one character in the last line, so in order not to appear abrupt
… reduced inter-character spacing is used

xfq: If there is no problem in the description, I will merge it

Eric: feel free to merge it


xfq: In addition to quotations or highlighted sentences, Fangsong is also commonly used in secondary titles
… any comment?

Eric: why "secondary title" instead of "subtitle"?

xfq: "subtitle(s)" can also mean transcript of the dialog in films, so it is somewhat ambiguous

Eric: OK

huijing: +1




xfq: I added two figures for increased/reduced inter-character spacing
… font is Noto Sans CJK SC

Eric: How about drawing frames outside the characters?

xfq: I used figures in jlreq as templates of these two figures, and jlreq don't have frames outside the characters

Eric: it's better than nothing, and they can be improved in the future
… feel free to merge them


xfq: 基文 (base text) is not necessarily a character. It can be a word, sentence, or even paragraph.
… in jlreq it's "base character" instead of "base text"


Eric: in main text of jlreq, "base characters" (plural) is often used

xfq: the Chinese text is 文字词或语句

Eric: OK. We can merge this PR.


xfq: No change to the text
… I added ids to the Glossary to identify the terms when linking

huijing: it's very useful

Eric: +1


xfq: as I said in the PR, I didn't change the description in Appendix A for now
… since I'm not a big fan of maintaining the same information in two different places
… the appendix can sometimes be used to summarize the content scattered throughout the main text, but this is not the case
… I suggest we remove information about line breaking in the appendix

Eric: agreed

xfq: Is there any issue with the content?

Eric: I'm OK with it

xfq: I'm OK with the requirements. Some requirements have not yet been written in css-text or implemented, and I will push on their side.

Eric: we need to actively document our requirements first

xfq: after removing information about line breaking in the appendix, do we need to review this PR again? Or can I just merge it?

Eric: feel free to merge it

xfq: kudos to Eric for working on this issue


xfq: I personally feel that there is no problem, and I am waiting for r12a's feedback
… I added a figure


xfq: any comment?
… this sentence is from 一地鸡毛


xfq: font is Noto Sans CJK SC

Eric: center-alignment ruby looks better
… leading should be increased
… or pinyin and words need to be closer
… currently, the position of the ruby text with respect to its base is not clear (it's not clear which side the ruby text belongs to)

xfq: looks like double-sided ruby
… in the current css-ruby draft, it seems that the distance between ruby text and base text cannot be adjusted
… but line-height can be adjusted

huijing: yes
… we might need a 'ruby-margin' property

xfq: yeah, 'ruby-position' is not enough
… there is a 'text-underline-offset' for text underline, for example


Eric: in Adobe InDesign, the distance between ruby text and base text can be adjusted
… adjusting it in CSS is also useful

xfq: I can raise an issue in CSSWG

huijing: yeah, adjusting line-height is not enough for all use cases


xfq: waiting for Richard's reply


xfq: waiting for Bobby

Rewrite of Compression Rules for Punctuation Marks


xfq: @RuixiZhang42 disagrees with the merginig of the current eight rules into three

Eric: I will take a closer look after the meeting
… in Taiwan and Hong Kong, compression rules for punctuation marks sometimes exist (but not always)
… I will reply to @RuixiZhang42 in the issue

Review corresponding CSS definition status



xfq: huijing changed the structure a little after the last meeting

huijing: I added an "Explanatory notes" section

xfq: I will try to fill in some content

huijing: You can just fill in the text, and I will add the links


Eric: I am writing an article about clreq and CSS, and I will send it to you within a month

Go through the issue list



Eric: I prefer "writing styles", but no strong opinion

xfq: I will submit a PR


xfq: In https://‌w3c.github.io/‌clreq/#han_characters , the English translation of 字面 is "letter face", but in the Glossary it is "character face"
… we should unify them
… in jlreq it is "letter face"

Eric: I suggest that we use "character face"

huijing: +1 to "character face"
… because we usually use "Chinese character" rather than "Chinese letter"

xfq: OK, I'll submit a PR


xfq: I added a "future" label to this issue

Eric: I agree that we should write this in clreq
… but in which section?

xfq: in jlreq, jidori is in the "Other Rules of Japanese Typesetting" section

Eric: we can also add an "Other Rules of Chinese Typesetting" section
… this is not very complicated, so I can write a proposal with an image

Next telecon time

May 7 (Thursday), 19:00-20:00 (UTC+8)

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 114 (Tue Mar 17 13:45:45 2020 UTC).