W3C

– DRAFT –
Chinese Layout Task Force Teleconference

08 August 2023

Attendees

Present
Eiso, Eric, huijing, xfq_, Yijun, Zhengyu
Regrets
-
Chair
xfq_
Scribe
xfq_

Meeting minutes

[Discuss Blissymbols & ruby]

Go through the issue list

https://github.com/w3c/clreq/issues

w3c/clreq#555

Eric: I didn't see xfq's questions in w3c/clreq#555 (comment)

Eric: The numbers here are the result of an analysis of many references

Eric: it is mainly for printing

Eric: Whether to keep this value on the web is up for discussion

Eric: it is best to use a multi-column layout in vertical writing mode

[Discuss the numbers in jlreq]

Eric: For different paper sizes and font sizes, the best line length is different.

Eiso: I think it is useful for e-books

[Discuss reference sources for the numbers here]

[Discuss Eric's proposed text]

Eric: I'll comment on the issue

xfq: can you help translate the text into English, huijing?

huijing: sure

[Discuss the guidelines in WCAG: https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#visual-presentation ]

Eric: What is the reference source for the numbers listed in WCAG? It is not listed.

[Discuss why the line length should be limited]

Yijun: Can we write down the rationale for limiting the line length?

Eric: clreq is a requirements document, not a thesis

Eric: if we write down the rationale for every requirement, the document will become too long.

Eiso: I think WCAG should also consider vertical writing mode.

Eiso: because web pages also support vertical writing mode

Eric: yes

Zhengyu: I think this 80 characters limit is very arbitrary, even for English, this value is greatly affected by the font size and font

w3c/clreq#560

[Eric introduces the issue]

Eric: clreq is a requirement document and do not need to write specific implementation methods

Eric: We need to care about whether this requirement exists, whether it needs to be written into clreq, and how to write the requirement clearly.

[Discuss specific needs]

Eiso: For publishing houses, comparisons between modern Chinese and classical Chinese are common.

Eric: Can you find some pictures and share them with us?

Eiso: sure

Zhengyu: We also need to discuss whether we need semantic markup for this requirement? My point of view is the same as r12a's.
… I think the current CSS can already solve this problem

Eiso: I think semantic markup is more complicated and there are many things to consider. It will be easier with CSS.

Zhengyu: a "wrappable column-primary table"

[Discuss whether it is possible to use ruby for this use case]

Eric: let's wait for Eiso to collect requirements first.
… If the requirements are the same as other scripts, maybe we don’t need to write it in clreq

[Discuss whether to use left, center, or right alignment]

w3c/clreq#557

[Discuss the proposed text]

huijing: I'll raise a PR

Zhengyu: shouldn't it be called runt instead of orphan?

https://www.herronprinting.com/resources/the-ideas-collection/all-alone-and-misunderstood-widows-orphans-runts-and-rivers/

xfq: let's discuss this in a separate issue

Eric: agreed

Eric: Strictly speaking, a runt refer to a word rather than a character.

[Discuss 'text-wrap: pretty;']

https://twitter.com/chriscoyier/status/1681407724993798144

Zhengyu: We can add a note to talk about the translation of the term 孤字

https://www.w3.org/TR/dpub-latinreq/#orphans

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jJFD8nAUuiUX6ArFZQqQo8yTsvg8IuAq7oFrNQxPeqI/edit

Eiso: Handling orphans is a very important for us

Eiso: Some authors take this very seriously

Eric: Compared with Western text, Chinese is sometimes difficult to adjust.

Eric: because in Western text they can adjust the tracking

Eric: They have more space to adjust than Chinese

Eric: by the way, we should write the requirements for multi-line headings in section 4

w3c/clreq#554

huijing: I'll fix this

Next teleconference time

TPAC on 11–15 September

https://www.w3.org/2023/09/TPAC/schedule.html

September 5 (Tuesday), 19:00-20:00 (UTC+8)

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 222 (Sat Jul 22 21:57:07 2023 UTC).