Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[simple-ruby] "Treating group ruby as jukugo" seems odd #8

Closed
r12a opened this issue Mar 25, 2020 · 1 comment · Fixed by w3c/jlreq#205
Closed

[simple-ruby] "Treating group ruby as jukugo" seems odd #8

r12a opened this issue Mar 25, 2020 · 1 comment · Fixed by w3c/jlreq#205

Comments

@r12a
Copy link
Contributor

r12a commented Mar 25, 2020

3.3 Placement of group-ruby > BP w3c/jlreq#5 > NOTE
https://w3c.github.io/jlreq/docs/simple-ruby/#placement-of-group-ruby

As group-ruby is treated as a unit, there is no wrap opportunity. However, in some exceptional cases where it is wrapped, it is then processed similarly to jukugo-ruby.

Really?? Isn't it then jukugo-ruby rather than group-ruby, by definition? It's certainly difficult to know how to implement this without more details surrounding which cases we're talking about.

Perhaps that sentence should either be removed, or changed to say something like: Jukugo-ruby can often look like group-ruby, but allows for text to be wrapped inside the unit.
@frivoal
Copy link

frivoal commented Apr 3, 2020

This feels like a duplicate of #3

frivoal referenced this issue in frivoal/jlreq Apr 3, 2020
@frivoal
Fix translation of the note associated with figure 15
2f06f0d 
The original translation was problematic and not particularly faithful to
the original Japanese text, causing confusion and misunderstanding. This
should clear things up.

Closes #26
Closes #194
frivoal referenced this issue in w3c/jlreq Apr 3, 2020
@frivoal
Fix translation of the note associated with figure 15 (#205)
a54ef23 
The original translation was problematic and not particularly faithful to
the original Japanese text, causing confusion and misunderstanding. This
should clear things up.

Closes #26
Closes #194
@r12a r12a transferred this issue from w3c/jlreq Apr 3, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

Fix translation of the note associated with figure 15 frivoal/jlreq
2 participants
@frivoal @r12a