W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2013

Re: updated cite definition - please review

From: Bruce Lawson <brucel@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 13:08:21 +0100
Message-ID: <CAAFGRef7EUXAUMKfQHTzK3e0MvHxhoBNEpDwRb5NZ+_cEdHxdg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Jukka K. Korpela" <jukka.k.korpela@kolumbus.fi>
Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On 23 August 2013 12:52, Jukka K. Korpela <jukka.k.korpela@kolumbus.fi> wrote:
> The old definition is vague. So is the proposed new one. We have to live
> with the cite element, but not love it. Minimal change (or actually, no
> change to HTML 4.01) is the best way.

This change is to restore the HTML 4.01 way. By removing the ability
to cite authors, lots of people have spent a good deal of time
attempting to find other ways of marking that up, leading to potential
code bloat (wrapping blockquotes in <figure>, for example, so they can
use a <figcaption> instead of <cite> inside / next to a <blockquote>).
Received on Friday, 23 August 2013 12:08:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:34 UTC