- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2013 15:56:27 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23175 --- Comment #7 from Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> --- (In reply to Josh Tumath from comment #5) > > Is that correct? > [ snip ]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. So, I must then take you to *not* have meant that “John Smith” is (quoting myself) “yet another work”. Which means that you have used <cite> incorrectly. It seems to me that the problem you are raising would be a problem regardless where the <cite> was used. You are discussing the question about how to discern between <cite> as reference to a “source” (such as a person of the name ”John Smith”) versus <cite> as reference to a “work”. (Citing the spec: “The cite element represents a reference to a creative work.”) The answer to *your* problem is: Don’t use <cite> to indicate “source”. Use <cite> correctly: Use it to indicate a “works”. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 6 September 2013 15:56:28 UTC