44515 2010-08-24 05:01:56 -0700 Implement ruby CSS display values 2023-10-08 11:17:58 -0700 1 1 1 Unclassified WebKit CSS 528+ (Nightly build) All All RESOLVED DUPLICATE 261468 http://beta.html5test.com/testcases/ruby/index.html BrowserCompat P2 Normal --- 261468 40829 1 info webkit-unassigned ahmad.saleem792 ap eoconnor eric haraken hyatt karlcow mmaxfield ntim paulirish rniwa syoichi zalan zcorpan oldest_to_newest 268484 0 info 2010-08-24 05:01:56 -0700 When HTML5 ruby elements are rendered their display property values are inline or block. The HTML5 specification *1 suggest the use of 'ruby' for <ruby> elements, 'ruby-text' for <rt> elements and 'none' for <rp> elements. Additionally 'ruby-base' is suggested for children of <ruby> elements that are not <rt> or <rp> elements. These display property values correspond to the values defined in the CSS3 Ruby Module *2. Even though full support for this CSS module is not present at the moment, the HTML5 ruby support should use the suggested display property values. This change is worth 3 points on the HTML5test *3 which currently does not award any points to Webkit for ruby support. --- *1 http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/rendering.html#display-types *2 http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-ruby/ *3 http://html5test.com/ 307131 1 ap 2010-11-09 19:59:40 -0800 See also: bug 47596. 312029 2 hyatt 2010-11-20 19:55:55 -0800 The problem here is that ruby can work as both an inline or block construct (or even as an inline-block construct). A single display type, "ruby", is insufficient to model this. The CSS3 Ruby draft has huge flaws, and if you're basing your HTML5 test suite off it, then you need to fix your test suite. I think the HTML5 spec should be amended to drop all mention of unique Ruby display types until problems like this can be addressed. The ruby-base and ruby-text display types are fine, but the Ruby display type needs to be broken into two display types. We'd be willing to break the inline-block version of Ruby since it would rarely be desired, but I don't think we want positioning or floating a ruby to suddenly turn off its ruby behavior. Therefore block-level ruby has to be specifiable. 312030 3 hyatt 2010-11-20 20:19:50 -0800 Also, one of your ruby tests is buggy and is testing for a display value of hidden rather than none for the rp element. 312034 4 hyatt 2010-11-20 20:33:00 -0800 Note that even if we did add these display types, we would have to add them as -webkit-ruby-text, etc., so we wouldn't pass your test anyway. 539979 5 eric 2012-01-20 18:13:07 -0800 http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-ruby/#display also seems relevant. I agree with Dave, the test should be fixed to not depend on these display types until the specs settle down. 540008 6 eric 2012-01-20 18:55:57 -0800 https://github.com/NielsLeenheer/html5test/issues/51 was the original bug filed against the test suite. 1745378 7 zcorpan 2021-03-30 15:51:53 -0700 See https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/2134 for 'display' of <rp> (outside ruby). Chromium and Gecko and the spec have rp { display: none } but WebKit uses display: inline here http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/saved/9130 1875883 8 ahmad.saleem792 2022-06-14 15:11:35 -0700 This seems to be clarified in Spec discussion and now Blink and Gecko aligns with each other based on Comment 07 (refer to Spec discussion link). Is this need to be updated within Webkit? https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/blob/8afe31a018b11741abdf9b4d5bb973d7c1d9ff05/Source/WebCore/html/RubyElement.cpp#L56 Thanks! 1888365 9 ntim 2022-08-02 05:03:23 -0700 (In reply to Dave Hyatt from comment #2) > The problem here is that ruby can work as both an inline or block construct > (or even as an inline-block construct). A single display type, "ruby", is > insufficient to model this. The CSS3 Ruby draft has huge flaws, and if > you're basing your HTML5 test suite off it, then you need to fix your test > suite. > > I think the HTML5 spec should be amended to drop all mention of unique Ruby > display types until problems like this can be addressed. > > The ruby-base and ruby-text display types are fine, but the Ruby display > type needs to be broken into two display types. We'd be willing to break > the inline-block version of Ruby since it would rarely be desired, but I > don't think we want positioning or floating a ruby to suddenly turn off its > ruby behavior. Therefore block-level ruby has to be specifiable. CSS display module level 3 addresses this by separating display into outer display and inner display. 1903527 10 ahmad.saleem792 2022-10-05 14:21:31 -0700 Fixed in Safari Technology Preview 155 due to updating UA Stylesheet to make "rp" as display:none aligned with Standard. All browsers show "in body" in this test now - http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/js/live-dom-viewer/?saved=9130 Safari 16 show "rp in body". Marking this as "RESOLVED CONFIGURATION CHANGED". 1903749 11 ntim 2022-10-06 07:52:32 -0700 I do think we should implement display: ruby / inline ruby / block ruby like Firefox does, and use them in our UA stylesheet, instead of hacking it in `createElementRenderer`. 1906029 12 karlcow 2022-10-16 20:40:11 -0700 Some status https://wpt.fyi/results/css?label=master&label=experimental&aligned&view=subtest&q=status%3Afail%20ruby chr edge fx saf tp 108 108. 107 155 css-break/ 4 / 4 4 / 4 0 / 4 2 / 4 css-content/ 0 / 1 0 / 1 0 / 1 0 / 1 css-ruby/ 22 / 100 27 / 100 89 / 100 13 / 100 css-text-decor/ 0 / 6 0 / 6 6 / 6 0 / 6 css-ui/ 0 / 1 0 / 1 1 / 1 0 / 1 Subtest Total 26 / 112 31 / 112 96 / 112 15 / 112 1983586 13 ntim 2023-10-08 11:17:34 -0700 Bug 261468 implements some of this. 1983587 14 ntim 2023-10-08 11:17:58 -0700 *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 261468 ***