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

Re: is it necessary to disambiguate (using markup) inline notes,citations and original markup? [was] use of <mark> to denote notes in quoted text

From: Jukka K. Korpela <jukka.k.korpela@kolumbus.fi>
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2013 13:42:03 +0300
Message-ID: <522DA5FB.4070001@kolumbus.fi>
To: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
2013-09-09 13:27, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
> There is no real-world disagreement about the fact that the the 
> responsibility for whether one uses <em>, <i> or <font> is the the 
> author of the current page. That is, in my view, a straw man.

I don’t quite see what are referring to.

If quoted text (no matter what, if any, markup is used to indicate it as 
a quotation) is from a web page, or generally an HTML document, then it 
seems natural to require that the original markup be preserved, unless 
there is a technical reason that prevents it. Even if it is deprecated, 
obsolete, and whatever, it’s what the author of the quoted page has 
chosen, so in a quotation, it shall not be “fixed” any more than you are 
allowed to “fix” factual errors or wrong opinions.

If quoted text is from another format, such as plain text file or 
printed book, then I would say that markup be used only when there is an 
obvious choice in HTML, mainly <p> for paragraphs. For italic, for 
example, it’s debatable whether we should use just <i>, leaving it to 
the recipient to interpret it (as a reader of a printed book has to do), 
or whether we should use e.g. <em> or <cite> or <var> if the author’s 
intent is clear. I would say that given the semantic mess around <em> 
and friends, clear cases really don’t exist.

-- 
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Received on Monday, 9 September 2013 10:42:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:39 UTC