Re: [css-text-decor] Emphasis marks and auto-hiding ruby annotation

fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote on 2016/12/27 21:35:26
> On 11/13/2015 09:02 AM, Koji Ishii wrote:
> > On 11/11/2015 11:02 AM, Xidorn Quan wrote:> Hi,
> >>
> >> I have a question that, if the annotation of a character is
> >> autohidden, where should the emphasis mark be drawn for this
> >> character?
> >>
> >> The current spec says:
> >>  # If emphasis marks are applied to characters for which ruby is drawn
> >>  # in the same position as the emphasis mark, the emphasis marks are
> >>  # placed outside the ruby.
> >>
> >> It reads to me that if the annotation is autohidden, the emphasis mark
> >> would be rendered immediately on top of the character, and in the same
> >> line as other annotations, is that correct?
> >>
> >> To be more clear, the question is, if we have ruby like:
> >>   ふ がな
> >>   振り仮名
> >> and we apply emphasis marks on it, which result makes more sense?
> >>   、、、、
> >>   ふ がな
> >>   振り仮名
> >> or
> >>   、 、、
> >>   ふ、がな
> >>   振り仮名
> >> ？
> >
> > The situation can happen without auto-hide, and I saw both examples, so
> > the spec avoids saying which specifically, only "emphasis marks come
> > outside of ruby" (figure 9 of the spec[1].)
> >
> > Authors may want to specify in future, or can live with either, I can't
> > answer at this moment.
> >
> > In my personal opinion, especially when the middle part is missing, the
> > former (consistent position) looks better. On the other hand, if emphasis
> > marks are on the whole paragraph, and only one character has ruby, the
> > latter might look better. Choosing either by auto-hide or not might be
> > one possible option.
> >
> > [1] https://drafts.csswg.org/css-text-decor-3/#text-emphasis-position-property
> 
> There was previous discussion on the positioning of emphasis marks
> in the presence of ruby. See
>    http://www.w3.org/mid/AEB4771C-8ED0-49DD-B444-34F2BE54F85F@w3.org
>      continuing at https://www.w3.org/mid/4D277EC5.2050607@w3.org
>    https://www.w3.org/mid/A592E245B36A8949BDB0A302B375FB4E201BF47330@MAILR001.mail.lan
>    https://www.w3.org/mid/510C6999.9050000@inkedblade.net
> 
> The conclusion was that the behavior illustrated in the spec is required,
> which is why we did not illustrate both options. :) See
>    https://www.w3.org/mid/5136E94C.9010605@inkedblade.net
> 
> That said, I think auto-hidden ruby is a special case, and we should
> probably spec Gecko's behavior for that.
> 
> A related question is then, what about empty annotations? Should they
> match the behavior of auto-hidden ruby or non-annotated text?

I agree that the Gecko's behavior is pretty good, and I think the emphasis mark position should be consistent within a ruby element (empty annotations should match the behavior of auto-hidden).

So both
    <em>ああ<ruby><rb>振<rb>り<rb>仮<rb>名<rt>ふ<rt>り<rt>が<rt>な</ruby>ああ</em>
    (auto-hidden ruby annotation for "り")
and
    <em>ああ<ruby><rb>振<rb>り<rb>仮<rb>名<rt>ふ<rt><rt>が<rt>な</ruby>ああ</em>
    (empty ruby annotation for "り")
should have the same result:
  、、、、
、、ふ がな、、
ああ振り仮名ああ

I think this behavior is reasonable for readability, and also because of the ruby layout structure (similar to the table structure, the cell position in a row should not change when a cell in the previous row is empty).


--
Shinyu Murakami
Founder & CTO, Vivliostyle Inc.

Received on Saturday, 8 April 2017 11:55:20 UTC