-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Ruby styling #121
Comments
The diff corresponds to when implementers referred the CSS Ruby spec, as it's changing quite often and quite drastically. Gecko implemented after the last large refactor of the spec, so it's most up-to-date. I'm not familiar with how much copy of CSS specs HTML spec should have. Is it possible to simply delegate to CSS Ruby as it's still WD and is possibly to evolve further? That makes CSS spec editors a bit happier to maintain single copy. Or do we want to have the minimum common denominator in HTML spec? |
That's a good question. I've never seen a CSS spec with UA stylesheets in them before, and I note that that entire appendix is marked informative. So we'd want to have a normative definition somewhere, probably in HTML since that's where the rest of the UA stylesheet is defined (I think?). We also need something that reflects reality. The Ruby spec you reference is reasonably close to Firefox, but not to any other browsers. So it doesn't seem likely to be a good reference anyway. |
The HTML Standard should contain the default styling for ruby elements. CSS should just define how those styles are to be rendered. CSS should not define the look-and-feel of HTML markup though. |
Thank you both, understood, but...this looks hard. No UA other than Gecko, AFAIK, has implemented And you're right, the CSS spec is still much before call-for-implementation, and after a large refactor, so it's far from "commonly implemented." Maybe disregard the |
Ruby parsing got forked in two directions. This aligns the parser with the majority of implementations. Remaining implementations have agreed to make these changes as well, hopefully leading us back to fully interoperable HTML parsing. This does not make either rb or rtc elements conforming. It also does not change any rendering rules. That is separately discussed in #121.
Ruby parsing got forked in two directions. This aligns the parser with the majority of implementations. Remaining implementations have agreed to make these changes as well, hopefully leading us back to fully interoperable HTML parsing. This does not make either rb or rtc elements conforming. It also does not change any rendering rules. That is separately discussed in #121.
Ruby parsing got forked in two directions. This aligns the parser with the majority of implementations. Remaining implementations have agreed to make these changes as well, hopefully leading us back to fully interoperable HTML parsing. This does not make either rb or rtc elements conforming. It also does not change any rendering rules. That is separately discussed in #121.
FWIW, the W3C i18n wg recently resolved to ask html to remove |
@upsuper note the request has been fulfilled w3c/html#579 |
@upsuper shouldn't it have its own issue rather than just a comment to this issue? I support it. |
From #1799
|
Fixes whatwg#1771, fixes whatwg#121 Co-authored-by: fantasai <[email protected]>
Fixes whatwg#1771, fixes whatwg#121 Co-authored-by: fantasai <[email protected]>
Fixes whatwg#1771, fixes whatwg#121 Co-authored-by: fantasai <[email protected]>
Fixes whatwg#1771, fixes whatwg#121 Co-authored-by: fantasai <[email protected]>
Fixes whatwg#1771, fixes whatwg#121 Co-authored-by: fantasai <[email protected]>
Fixes whatwg#1771, fixes whatwg#121 Co-authored-by: fantasai <[email protected]>
Fixes whatwg#1771, fixes whatwg#121 Co-authored-by: fantasai <[email protected]>
#101 is trying to sort out the parser. Here is some data on the UA styling:
HTML Standard
W3C HTML 5.1
Chrome
WebKit
Firefox
It seems likely we should not have any styling rules for rb and rtc, as those are only in Gecko (plus W3C HTML).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: