[Bug 23175] Use of <cite> in <blockquote> has conflicting semantics

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23175

--- Comment #5 from Josh Tumath <josh@joshtumath.me.uk> ---
(In reply to Leif Halvard Silli from comment #2)
> The way I, at first, read this was that the example represents a quotation
> from another work who is, in turn, quoting yet another work. 
> 
> Is that correct?

That is why I have raised this issue. That's actually incorrect. The example is
a (fictitious) quotation from the source "John Smith", who cites the work
"Doctor Who" in his utterance. That's the meaning I intended, but a different
meaning could be interpreted, like you said.

(In reply to Leif Halvard Silli from comment #1)
> Actually, <cite> is not forbidden inside <q>: 
> 
> “Contexts in which this element can be used: Where phrasing content is
> expected.“
> 
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/single-page.html#the-cite-
> element
> 
> One should think that <cite> inside <q> will increase in use now that <cite>
> is allowed inside <blockquote>. After all, it is the same pattern. And this
> use should remain permitted (as long as <cite> is allowed in <blockquote>,
> at least).

Yes, that would indeed be fine. However, my point is that (like in my
blockquote example), if you use <cite> to show the source of the quote, but
place that <cite> within the quote, that <cite>'s content would be treated as
part of the quote, and could be interpreted as a part of the speaker's
utterance when that actually might not intended.

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

Received on Friday, 6 September 2013 15:17:58 UTC