[rfc-i] v3imp #4 Ruby text

"Martin J. Dürst" duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp
Fri Jan 23 01:24:01 PST 2015


Hello Sean,

On 2015/01/23 18:04, Sean Leonard wrote:
> Improvement Need
> #4 Ruby text
>
> This improvement calls for support for ruby text, also known as
> interlinear annotation. If you are not familiar, check out
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_character>.

I'm familiar with it :-). But for everybody, could you please explain 
where specifically in Internet drafts you would want to use ruby? Some 
of your earlier mails give very specific, technology-related examples, 
but this is missing here.

Regards,   Martin.

> Support can be in markup form {<ruby> <rt> <rp> -- see HTML5} or by
> supporting the raw Unicode code points {U+FFF9 U+FFFA U+FFFB}.
>
> Personally I think the Unicode code points are sufficient for the
> canonical format; a formatter can convert these codes into appropriate
> markup (e.g., HTML5 <ruby>). However as our own Martin J. Dürst is the
> co-author of UTR-20 <http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr20/#Interlinear>,
> the markup position may win out.
>
> My biggest concern is that introducing <ruby> markup into the v3 format
> may significantly complicate canonical processing, since interlinear
> annotation is applicable to structured text fields (e.g., author names,
> document title, references), not just unstructured spec-text. HTML5
> really goes quite overboard with the ruby elements; I believe it is
> unreasonable to require support for that level of complexity from all
> xml2rfc-related tools. Furthermore, putting ruby into artwork *should*
> be allowed—this requires no additional work for the v3 vocabulary since
> the Unicode code points are already allocated.
>
> Sean
>
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list