- From: Ryan Roberts <hello@ryanroberts.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2009 22:39:48 +0100
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- CC: Seth Call <sethcall@gmail.com>, "T.J. Crowder" <tj@crowdersoftware.com>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Arthur Clifford <art@artspad.net>, public-html-comments@w3.org, Yahia Chlyeh <cyahia@gmail.com>
- Message-ID: <4AA18924.1050002@ryanroberts.co.uk>
Ian Hickson wrote: > 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>. > This makes little sense. What you're saying is <q> has no semantic purpose anymore, it's there for presentation (see your further down). What is the point in moving things forward if we can't correct past mistakes? > 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. 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. > Then hand the spec over to them. > 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>. > So at this point how do you mark up an inline quote? Ryan -- Web Designer Web: http://ryanroberts.co.uk Email: hello@ryanroberts.co.uk Phone: 07759 917 964
Received on Friday, 4 September 2009 21:40:35 UTC