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

RE: <q>

From: Justin James <j_james@mindspring.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 23:01:44 -0400
To: "'Gonzalo Rubio'" <gonchuki@gmail.com>
Cc: "'Ivan Enderlin'" <w3c@hoa-project.net>, "'Olivier GENDRIN'" <olivier.gendrin@gmail.com>, "'Ben Boyle'" <benjamins.boyle@gmail.com>, "'Sam Kuper'" <sam.kuper@uclmail.net>, "'Chris Wilson'" <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, "'HTML WG'" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000801c93972$acdb7bd0$06927370$@com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-html-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Gonzalo Rubio
> Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 10:39 AM
> To: Justin James
> Cc: Ivan Enderlin; Olivier GENDRIN; Ben Boyle; Sam Kuper; Chris Wilson;
> HTML WG
> Subject: Re: <q>
> 
> In fact, while quoting Justin above I got into a (possible) crucial
> part of the spec if we decide to default the <q> element to not add
> any automatic punctuation at all: do manually added quotes go inside
> or outside of the <q> element?
> I mean, is it:
> - <q>"blockquote is to div as q is to span"</q>
> or
> - "<q>blockquote is to div as q is to span</q>"
> as for what CSS does today the second option would be correct, but
> those quotes have no real meaning outside of the semantical element
> that gives them a reason to be there. If we are going to change or
> specify a way for the <q> element to be used, we need to come to an
> agreement on how authors are supposed to use it.

Ironically, if you look at how block quotes are usually rendered in printed
publications, they do not have quotation marks at all, and instead, rely
upon presentation (indentation, line breaks, sometimes italics, sometimes a
different font) to indicate to the reader that they are quotes. :)

J.Ja
Received on Wednesday, 29 October 2008 03:02:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:58 UTC