(Note that I asked for further feedback on this very issue and never received it: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20114#c9
I also have already pointed out in detail why the proposed model for double-sided ruby is more complicated than the one in the HTML spec now: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20115#c6
Plus, the proposal of adding more elements means more churn and complexity in the parser, which is especially sad since this is only beneficial for the transitory period. It's a cost we have to pay forever, for a short-term benefit.)
(Note that I asked for further feedback on this very issue and never received it: /www.w3. org/Bugs/ Public/ show_bug. cgi?id= 20114#c9
https:/
I also have already pointed out in detail why the proposed model for double-sided ruby is more complicated than the one in the HTML spec now: /www.w3. org/Bugs/ Public/ show_bug. cgi?id= 20115#c6
https:/
Plus, the proposal of adding more elements means more churn and complexity in the parser, which is especially sad since this is only beneficial for the transitory period. It's a cost we have to pay forever, for a short-term benefit.)