文本中多处中西混排没有依照 3.2.2，3.2.4 留出空白。

[Dr-How]

不知这是否构成问题。举两个例子：

• 3.2.1 缩写处，1999_年，ASCII_字元，等；
• Abstract 中多处 W3C 之后没有留空；

似乎还有很多。

[r12a]

There used to be a CSS property, auto-space, specifically for separating Chinese characters from latin/numbers. It was implemented by IE. I have to admit that i'm not fully conversant with its current status, but i seem to remember that it was removed from the CSS spec until a later date. I think it wasn' implemented by Firefox/Chrome. May be worth investigating.

In general, i think we should probably review the styling for the layout requirements doc before we publish the FPWD to see what things we can influence by adding a local style sheet – so that the document follows, as much as possible, what we preach in the document itself. (To be honest, i don't think that was done for the jlreq doc.)

[bobbytung]

It might be text-spacing in CSS Text Module Level 4.

[siusin]

@lianghai
Any thoughts? Shall we remove this rule from the document or mark it as a suggestion?

[lianghai]

这份文档不应使用 text-spacing 那样还未受到广泛支持的 CSS 属性或者特殊的 JavaScript 处理，否则文档内不稳定的排版样式会令读者困惑。
在目前 CSS 还没能实现这些高级排版特性的情况下，我建议我们应当使这份文档尽量在「纯文本」层面上正确。我个人偏好在纯文本情况下使用中西文间空格字符，但当然，因为中西文间空格字符是有争议的，该文档全文不用中西文间空格字符也是个足够明确的做法。

[bobbytung]

原則上：

• 文稿間中文與英文不加空白。
• 也不使用JavaScript Polyfill。

我之前寫「簡單做好中文排版」時，也遇到讀者來信這麼問。回覆就是：
目前text-spacing還在CSS Text Level 4草稿裡，就是以目前標準技術做不到。

可能要請梁海與各位多擔待，撰寫時就統一體例，不加中西文間空白。

[lianghai]

好，那大家就统一不加空格吧（将中西文间距视作「样式」而非「内容」）。
这样明确的态度很好。

[jjgod]

原則上：

文稿間中文與英文不加空白。
也不使用JavaScript Polyfill。

Any particular reasons for that? Since text-spacing is not technically ready I do prefer spaces.

[ethantw]

Bobby and I think the spaces are presentational not semantic. Inserting spaces in between is somehow like indenting text/paragraphs with spaces. It is also a convention used by Wikipedia and JLReq.

[ethantw]

If we choose to believe that the spaces between Hanzi and Western scripts are semantic, which I have no problem with. But maybe section 3.2 should not even be included in the document. The main purpose of CLReq is about text layout, not telling people to spell correctly, use proper characters or type spaces after Western periods.

[upsuper]

Things like “typing spaces after Western periods” probably should at least be mentioned in a note, since it could have impact on layout. I think probably everything about space is worth being mentioned in a layout requirement doc.

[Dr-How]

Spaces between Chinese characters and western words can be semantic, but also part of the style.

Check these examples:

• In Chinese, the character 打 means love.
• 微软使用 das Auto 作为广告语。
  In these examples, the spaces are semantically necessary.

For only one word in Chinese context, the spaces are also important for the style.
If the technique is not ready for this, we simply input the spaces manually in the raw text.

It seems that, you regard everything input by human as "content", and everything decided by code as "style".  This is ridiculous.  Style was already there since the beginning of printing, and is always manually taken care of.  We input line breaks, input indentations, all manually.  What's the problem of inputting the spaces manually.

Spaces are part of the style that are semantically important.
When the technique is not yet ready, we input spaces manually.

Am 06.04.2015 13:01 schrieb Chen Yijun notifications@github.com:If we choose to believe that the spaces between Hanzi and Western scripts are semantic, which I have no problem with. But maybe section 3.2 should not even be included in the document. The main purpose of CLReq is about text layout, not telling people to spell correctly, use proper characters or typing spaces after Western periods.

[upsuper]

When a space is semantically necessary, we certainly should add a whitespace in content. However, when we inputing whitespaces only because technique is not ready for styling, I'd tend to avoid doing so, especially given that whitespaces could have semantic meaning.