W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > December 2008

Re: proposed change to dialog example in HTML5 section 4.6.26

From: Gregory J. Rosmaita <oedipus@hicom.net>
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2008 13:13:47 +0000
To: Smylers <Smylers@stripey.com>, public-html@w3.org
Message-Id: <20081208130828.M61065@hicom.net>

aloha, smylers!

1. "whatcha" is an abbreviation for "what do you want" no matter what
it's origins or nature -- therefore, ABBR is appropriate for use in 
glossing "whatcha" (perhaps with an additional lang="en-x-slang" ;-)

2. how exactly is the SPAN containing the string "This is obviously a
lie" to be conveyed to the user?

3. in the absence of a means of marking text contained in DIALOG, 
but which is not dialogue, how is one to indicate stage directions or 
non-dialogue text contained in a dialogue container or emotional states?  
why is there not a <nd></nd> tag set that indicates that what it 
contains is NOT dialog (hence, nd)

4. instead of DIALOG/DIALOGUE the element should be renamed simply D, 
and the DT and DD elements should be used to give dialogue a structure
(a definition list) NOT as generic indicators of dialogue:

<dd><nd>[obviously lying]</nd> Sorry, we're just closing for lunch</dd>

5. why should HTML5 -- let alone "XHTML5" -- not be able to incorporate 
EmotionML?  what substitute for EmotionML would you advocate to convey
emotional states, such as conveying to the user the fact that the 
shopkeeper is obviously lying other than by explicitly stating that 
that is the case?

5. the means of conveying EmotionML is limited only by one's 
imagination; using CSS-Speech, one can set a voice change or aural icon 
to express the emotional state; visually, one could have EmotoinML 
expressed using an emoticon or an iconic equivalent (as happens on 
some wikis to identify external, mailto, and other non-http-request 
links); one could use CSS' :before to indicate that the following line 
is a lie; the exposition method offered by EmotionML, therefore, is 
FAR more robust, and far more specific, than using SPAN to indicate 
emotional states; or you can ignore it as a red herring or wishful 

CONSERVATIVE, n.  A statesman who is enamored of existing evils,
as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them 
with others.         -- Ambrose Bierce, _The Devil's Dictionary_
             Gregory J. Rosmaita, oedipus@hicom.net
  Camera Obscura: http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/index.html

---------- Original Message -----------
From: Smylers <Smylers@stripey.com>
To: public-html@w3.org
Sent: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 01:38:21 +0000
Subject: Re: proposed change to dialog example in HTML5 section 4.6.26

> Gregory J. Rosmaita writes:
> > the dialog example in section 4.6.26 of the 3 december 2008 version of
> > the html5 draft
> For the benefit of anybody following this thread later, when sections
> may have renumbered, this is the 'Footnotes' section.
> > should use ABBR not SPAN to gloss the colloquial pronunciation
> Colloquialisms aren't necessarily abbreviations.  Even if 
> "watcha" is deemed to be an abbreviation, there are other 
> colloquialisms which clearly aren't.  If <abbr> is the 
> appropriate way of marking those up as well then we need to 
> change <abbr>'s definition as well as this example.
> > and should use EmotionML to express that the shopkeeper is lying,
> > rather than using SPAN to "convey" such information:
> Why should it?  Is it permitted to use EmotionML in non-XML HTML 
> 5? Will it be required that all HTML 5 user agents also support EmotionML?
> Do current user agents have support for it?  In what way do they 
> convey that information to users?
> Smylers
------- End of Original Message -------
Received on Monday, 8 December 2008 13:15:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:40 UTC