- From: T.J. Crowder <tj@crowdersoftware.com>
- Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 22:13:18 +0100
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: Seth Call <sethcall@gmail.com>, Ryan Roberts <hello@ryanroberts.co.uk>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Arthur Clifford <art@artspad.net>, public-html-comments@w3.org, Yahia Chlyeh <cyahia@gmail.com>
2009/9/4 Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> > > On Wed, 2 Sep 2009, Seth Call wrote: > > > > For IE8, FF 3.5, and Opera 10 (although not Safari 4), this behavior of > > adding quotes is done with the default CSS style sheet of the browser; > > not in the HTML rendering itself. > > > > If you style q like so: > > > > q:before { > > > content: no-open-quote; > > > } > > > > > > q:after { > > > content: no-close-quote; > > > } > > > > > > > > > Then the quotes go away in those 3 browsers. > > On Wed, 2 Sep 2009, T.J. Crowder wrote: > > > > Having the UA add the quotes is not a good idea, and will almost > > certainly lead to hacks like UAs looking to see if the quotes are > > already there and only adding them if they're not. > > > > Even if IE8, FF3.5, et. al. and such are already doing this, they're > > implementing the bleeding edge of this spec and should be agile enough > > to cope with changes to it as it is finalised. > > On Wed, 2 Sep 2009, Ryan Roberts wrote: > > > > Whether it's no common or not it's a bad idea that needs changing sooner > > rather than later. > > On Thu, 3 Sep 2009, Henri Sivonen wrote: > > > > It's a bad idea, sure. But it doesn't follow that <q> in itself is a > > good idea and needs changing. > > > > My conclusion is that adding quotes is a bad idea *and* <q> in itself > > isn't particularly useful. Thus, the solution is not to use <q> in > > newly-authored documents. > > > > Hixie, maybe <q> should be obsolete but conforming... > > On Thu, 3 Sep 2009, Arthur Clifford wrote: > > > > I think this comes down to how HTML/HTML5 is going to be utilized, is it > > describing a document object model; in which case a quote (or quoted > > text) is an object and proper display of a quote object should be up to > > the user agent, as informed by style sheets, thus keeping content and > > its face separate. Or is HTML merely a markup language, in which case > > what is the philosophical reason for having a q-tag? When is it used and > > why? > > > > Back when there were proof-readers they would mark-up something that > > should be a quote; isn't that what you're doing in html too? Quoted > > content needs to be distinguishable from the content around it, which is > > done with quotation-marks. Shouldn't the marks used in a document for > > quoted content be identifiable through styles and/or along with a > > section of quoted text? If so, isn't the quote tag the logical place to > > define those styles, either in a global style or as a style attribute on > > the quote tag? > > > > The localization argument I thought was a compelling argument for the > > user agent to handle putting in quotes. It is an example of what is > > possible when you treat a document as a DOM versus just marking up text. > > If quoted content is treated like an object then things like > > localization are easier to facilitate. > > > > I would hope that content-editors such as DreamWeaver would help out by > > indicating usage of " and q together and would somehow notify the user > > if that is what they want to do. The specification should recommend > > against an html renderer doing such checks though. I think people would > > figure out quickly that things are double-quoted and fixing that > > shouldn't be hard. > > If you want quote marks in the source, use quote marks in the source, and > don't use <q>. > > If you want quote marks added automatically, use <q>. > > It would be stupid of us to try to change this now given that all four > major browsers ship with a <q> that inserts quote marks Strongly disagree. The spec is *not final* yet. If vendors implement in-progress specs, they must expect them to change. Fix it now and within a year, it's done, implementations and content will be updated to match. To fail to correct this now just sets up ongoing, unnecessary silliness for years to come. > This was > discussed in depth last year, and the spec was changed (from not inserting > quotes to inserting quotes) after it was concluded that swimming against > the browser vendors here was futile. > > At this point, the <q> element's purpose is to enable CSS-based quotation > mark injection. If you don't want that, then don't use <q>. > > -- > Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL > http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. > Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' -- T.J. Crowder tj / crowder software / com www.crowdersoftware.com
Received on Friday, 4 September 2009 21:14:18 UTC