W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > April 2007

Re: CSS Generated content selection

From: Spartanicus <mk98762@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 16:12:26 +0100
Message-ID: <n2m-g.dnhp2353t6tlu0vsu6fo6gsj84o0csfofs@4ax.com>
To: www-style@w3.org

"Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk> wrote:

>> Following your reasoning it would be ok to omit
>> a full stop after the last sentence in the paragraph preceding another
>> since the latter paragraph makes it clear that the last sentence in the
>> preceding paragraph has ended.
>
>Not all paragraphs necessarily end in a full stop, though. If it's a  
>paragraph preceding a list, it may well end in a colon. Or it may need  
>an exclamation or question mark, etc. Regardless, at least a line  
>break is present when you copy/paste, which distinguishes the end of a  
>paragraph.

Does that mean that you support the omission of punctuation at the end
of the paragraph that precedes another paragraph or list?

>Inline quotes, on the other hand, are not clearly delimited  
>when copy/pasting if the quotes aren't included.

Which is why I said that quotes around inline quotations should be part
of the content proper.

For the current situation where some browsers insert quote marks around
content marked up with the <q> element (tested with Opera 9.1 & FF2) and
IE does not (tested with IE6), authors can specify:

q:before{content:""}
q:after{content:""}

which gets rid of the generated quotes in Opera and Mozilla, and then
maintain the quotes as part of the content proper.

(regrettably "content:none" isn't supported yet by either of these
browsers)

>> In support of the notion that the standard numbering on an ordered list
>> is mere presentation
>
>But the fact that an ordered list is ordered, rather than unordered,  
>does have semantic implications which should be denoted somehow,  
>regardless of presentation.

I'd question the value of doing so. I'm not a supporter of coding
semantics purely for semantics sake, otherwise there'd be a case for
<verb> etc.

Can you present a use case where the distinction is relevant if the
ability to reference by marker is dealt with by including such
references as part of the content proper?

>> is if you specify "ol li{display:inline}" then the
>> numbering disappears and there's no way to bring the standard numbering
>> back.
>
>That's a presentation choice

If it's a presentation choice then the numbers are presentational.

-- 
Spartanicus
Received on Monday, 23 April 2007 15:12:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:50 GMT