In order to resolve long standing bugs in the HTML5 spec, W3C I18N WG came up with Use Cases & Exploratory Approaches for Ruby Markup[1] note. After a discussion between I18N WG and HTML WG at TPAC, Robin @ HTML WG came up with HTML Ruby Markup Extensions spec[2], which was now merged into HTML5 CR Feb 2014[3]. Summary of changes are: 1. Properties of ruby and its related elements (rp, rt) are revised. This includes 8.1.2.4 Optional tags (a.k.a., tag omission rules)[4] for these tags. 2. Two elements are added (rb, rtc) My group is working with Robin to add supporting tests to html5lib-tests[5], and we expect to finish it soon. Robin also prepared a pull request for html5lib[6], which indicates that the required changes in the parser is quite minimal. I'd like to start working on this, along with importing the tests into webkit once it's done. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ruby-use-cases/ [2] http://darobin.github.io/html-ruby/ [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/CR-html5-20140204/text-level-semantics.html#the-ruby-element [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/CR-html5-20140204/syntax.html#syntax-tag-omission [5] https://github.com/html5lib/html5lib-tests/pull/27/files [6] https://github.com/html5lib/html5lib-python/pull/126/files
Created attachment 228526 [details] [WIP] preliminary experimental patch
Created attachment 229446 [details] Patch
Comment on attachment 229446 [details] Patch Now that 25 test cases are publicized for html5lib-tests, and the patch passes all the 25 tests, I'd appreciate review.
A couple of notes to the reviewer: * The link [6] in comment #1 might help you to understand if this patch matches to the scope of spec change. * The behavior changes are only when new tags (rb and rtc) are used, so there are no backward compatible issues.
Comment on attachment 229446 [details] Patch Clearing flags on attachment: 229446 Committed r167437: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/167437>
All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.
FWIW, I think this is a mistake (that's why this isn't in the WHATWG spec). See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33339#c110