[Bug 23019] Add ’quotations’ as one the types of content <figure> can be used to annotate

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23019

--- Comment #3 from heydon <heydon@heydonworks.com> ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > note the spec already has an example:
> > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/grouping-content.html#the-
> > blockquote-element
> 
> Thanks for the welcome note!
> 
> In my view, that example supports the appropriateness of the proposal in
> this bug.

Okay, I'm all for this <q> in a <figure> with <cite> in <figcaption> thing.
That's good. I don't think much needs to change for <q> except your suggestion
of explicitly adding the terminology "quotation" to the advice. 

But... I'd still like it to be clarified (RE the original bug
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22996#add_comment) why
"Attribution for the quotation, if any, must be placed outside the blockquote
element."

I appreciate that there could be confusion over whether you were, in fact,
quoting a <footer> rather than applying one _to_ quoted content, but what would
it matter when, conceptually, a <footer> from the source would surely have the
same clarification/attribution role as it would within it - certainly the
footer that is the direct descendant of the <blockquote>...

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Received on Tuesday, 20 August 2013 15:35:25 UTC