- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2013 14:07:42 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23175 Bug ID: 23175 Summary: Use of <cite> in <blockquote> has conflicting semantics Product: HTML WG Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: HTML5 spec Assignee: dave.null@w3.org Reporter: josh@joshtumath.me.uk QA Contact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org CC: mike@w3.org, public-html-admin@w3.org, public-html-wg-issue-tracking@w3.org The recent changes in the definitions of <cite> and <blockquote> have been a massive improvement. However, consider the following example: <blockquote> Who is your favourite doctor (in <cite>Doctor Who</cite>)? - <cite>John Smith</cite> </blockquote> We can see that, in that blockquote, there are two different uses for <cite>. The first represents the title of a work, and the second represents the source of the quote. Therefore, there is no semantic way to differentiate between the former and latter meaning. Therefore, I'd like to propose that it should be a requirement for authors to specify the source of a quote inside the <footer> element; rather than this just being optional. Note that this is not a problem with inline quotes, because the <cite> would be outside the quote tags: <q>Who is your favourite doctor (in <cite>Doctor Who</cite>)?</q> - <cite>John Smith</cite> -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 6 September 2013 14:07:44 UTC