47596 2010-10-13 09:27:30 -0700 Ruby isn't displayed correctly after switching from display:none to display:inline 2024-03-10 23:28:43 -0700 1 1 1 Unclassified WebKit Layout and Rendering 528+ (Nightly build) All All NEW http://kids.gakken.co.jp/kagaku/110ban/text/1480.html InRadar P2 Normal --- 1 ap webkit-unassigned ahmad.saleem792 hyatt koivisto ntim rolandsteiner zalan oldest_to_newest 293450 0 70615 ap 2010-10-13 09:27:30 -0700 Created attachment 70615 test case See attached test case, or try switching Furigana on at <http://kids.gakken.co.jp/kagaku/110ban/text/1480.html>. I'm not sure whether this is really expected to work. The default style for rt is block, but the site sets it to inline when toggling ruby on. But then, CSS3 Ruby Module has a whole lot of custom display styles for ruby, see <http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-ruby/#display>. So, perhaps both block and inline need some custom translation when applied to this element. I haven't checked whether this works in IE8. 293451 1 ap 2010-10-13 09:27:56 -0700 <rdar://problem/8452319> 293680 2 ap 2010-10-13 13:41:52 -0700 I checked now, and this works in IE. 293911 3 rolandsteiner 2010-10-13 19:39:40 -0700 It could be argued that the current behavior is correct as the ruby text is displayed inline, rather than as ruby text, just as specified by the JS. Toggling works if the code is changed to toggle between 'none' and empty string (i.e., not overwriting the browser default. It doesn't work correctly if toggling between 'none' and 'ruby-text' - this is due to the fact that so far we avoided implementing the ruby-specific display types, because of questions of the state and direction of the ruby spec(s). IIRC the current code explicitly "aborts" ruby rendering if the user tampers with the display type. If compatibility with IE is a goal, then one short term solution might be to just entirely ignore the display type on <rt> unless it's 'none', but I'm not sure that's a good idea. OTOH, even if we fully implement the ruby display-types, the example would still not work as intended, because it'd then need to specify 'ruby-text' rather than 'inline' (the latter would continue to be displayed as-is). Any inputs or other suggestions? 293965 4 ap 2010-10-13 22:32:43 -0700 From the very little data that I have (this single site), it appears that IE compatibility can be a reasonable goal, yes. 294272 5 hyatt 2010-10-14 12:22:12 -0700 Ignoring the display type is probably ok actually. I imagine that's what IE is doing. 294573 6 rolandsteiner 2010-10-14 21:52:16 -0700 Ignoring the display type does, however, imply that you could never (e.g., in user style sheets, or using JS) change <rt> to be displayed inline rather than as ruby text, on any site or device. Are you positive that sacrificing this functionality is a good exchange for the sake of IE compatibility? 294600 7 ap 2010-10-14 23:36:39 -0700 Would it make sense to decide whether to display <rt> inline based on whether <rp> was forced to be anything but display:none? 295916 8 rolandsteiner 2010-10-18 19:18:17 -0700 I'm not sure about this suggestion - on one hand it could certainly serve as a heuristic. On the other hand, not all ruby uses <rp>, and it would be a pretty opaque condition to describe to new developers. 307132 9 ap 2010-11-09 20:00:04 -0800 See also: bug 44515. 2020018 10 ntim 2024-03-10 23:28:43 -0700 I think this might be fixed with the recent ruby rewrite. 70615 2010-10-13 09:27:30 -0700 2010-10-13 09:27:30 -0700 test case ruby.html text/html 708 ap PG1ldGEgY2hhcnNldD0idXRmLTgiPgo8aDQgY2xhc3M9InRpdGxlIj7jg4njg6njgqTjgqLjgqTj grnjgpI8cnVieT7msLQ8cnA+77yIPC9ycD48cnQ+44G/44GaPC9ydD48cnA+77yJPC9ycD48L3J1 Ynk+44GrPHJ1Ynk+5YWlPHJwPu+8iDwvcnA+PHJ0PuOBhDwvcnQ+PHJwPu+8iTwvcnA+PC9ydWJ5 PuOCjOOCi+OBqOOBqeOBhuOBl+OBpuOBkeOCgOOCiuOBjOOBp+OCi+OBrjwvaDQ+CjxidXR0b24g b25jbGljaz0idG9nZ2xlKCkiPlRvZ2dsZSBSdWJ5PC9idXR0b24+CjxzY3JpcHQ+CnZhciBlbmFi bGVkID0gdHJ1ZTsKZnVuY3Rpb24gdG9nZ2xlKCkKewogICAgZW5hYmxlZCA9ICFlbmFibGVkOwoK ICAgIHZhciB0YWdzUnAgPSBkb2N1bWVudC5nZXRFbGVtZW50c0J5VGFnTmFtZSgncnAnKTsKICAg IHZhciB0YWdzUnQgPSBkb2N1bWVudC5nZXRFbGVtZW50c0J5VGFnTmFtZSgncnQnKTsKCiAgICBm b3IodmFyIHRhZ1JwIGluIHRhZ3NScCkKICAgICAgICBpZih0YWdzUnBbdGFnUnBdLnN0eWxlKSB0 YWdzUnBbdGFnUnBdLnN0eWxlLmRpc3BsYXkgPSBlbmFibGVkID8gJ2lubGluZScgOiAnbm9uZSc7 CiAgICAKICAgIGZvcih2YXIgdGFnUnQgaW4gdGFnc1J0KQogICAgICAgIGlmKHRhZ3NSdFt0YWdS dF0uc3R5bGUpIHRhZ3NSdFt0YWdSdF0uc3R5bGUuZGlzcGxheSA9IGVuYWJsZWQgPyAnaW5saW5l JyA6ICdub25lJzsKCn0KPC9zY3JpcHQ+