- From: T.J. Crowder <tj@crowdersoftware.com>
- Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 23:48:54 +0100
- To: art@artspad.net
- Cc: public-html-comments@w3.org
Art, I don't think we have it backward at all, quotes absolutely have semantic value, not to mention the huge degree of individual and cultural variation related to them. As a 20+ year software engineer, I can tell you I don't even want to come anywhere near writing code around that quagmire. But I *do* think Ian's point that this has been specified for over 10 years is the absolute last word (see my most recent note on this). I don't see respecifying it now, that would be asinine. -- T.J. 2009/9/4 Arthur Clifford <art@artspad.net>: > Ryan and TJ, > > > > I think you have things backward. > > > > In HTML tags are what identify the structure/content/semantics of a > document. Quotation marks (“) have no semantic value at all. The q tag on > the other hand identifies a section of text as being a quote. Since q tags > identify something as a quote, as an object within the document, it makes > more sense to affiliate the symbols to surround the quoted text during > display with the objects themselves; meaning it makes more sense to have the > q tag dictate quote marks. As a programmer I will tell you that if I wanted > to identify quoted material I’d much rather parse a well-formed html > document for a q and /q tag than “ marks. Besides “ is not a quote mark in > printing, there are open and closed quote marks. > > > > I understand the frustration regarding the argument that because the browser > vendors do it that’s the way it is going to be. I also understand Ian’s > perspective, but I would say the browser vendors went the way they did > because it makes more sense from a development perspective and ultimately a > user experience to do things that way. The syntax of any programming > language first and foremost is designed to make parsing it for use by the > software into a data structure. If you think of html as informing an object > model, then your opinion about quotes and q-tags becomes more and more > invalid. The current implementation of q is far more flexible for the > greatest number of outputs and use-cases. > > > > Ian missed a method of styling quotes the way you want: > > > > <p>blah blah blah, “<span style=”RyanQuotes”>some really awesome > quote</span>”</p> > > > > Art C > > Arthur Clifford > > > > ________________________________ > > From: public-html-comments-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-html-comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Roberts > Sent: Friday, September 04, 2009 3:11 PM > To: Ian Hickson > Cc: public-html-comments@w3.org > > Subject: Re: HTML5's Q element > > > > Ian Hickson wrote: > > On Fri, 4 Sep 2009, Ryan Roberts wrote: > > > > 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). > > > > > > I'm not sure what you mean by "semantic purpose". In what sense is all of > > HTML not just "there for presentation"? > > > > The whole point of HTML is to be a media-independent, platform- > > independent, stylable documenta and application language. Presentation (on > > multiple media, devices, etc) is the most important use case. > > > > > > Maybe I'm not explaining myself properly, I'm just a web designer and nobody > fancy. I believed many if not most elements such as <q>, were there to > describe the content. I see now this isn't the case with <q>, but it's only > really like that because it's broken and nobody wants to fix it. > > 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. > > > > > > In what sense have we not handed the spec over to them? Browser vendors, > > as the most high-profile implementors of the spec, have full control over > > what ends up being implemented. I'm not going to make the spec say > > somethin they won't do; that would just turn the spec into an especially > > dry form of science fiction. > > > > > > I understand that they have final say over what goes in their browsers, but > I can't say I like them having final say over the HTML5 spec itself. > > > > > > > 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? > > > > > > One of the following: > > > > <p>Ryan asked "So at this point how do you mark up an inline > > quote?"</p> > > > > <p>Ryan asked <q>So at this point how do you mark up an inline > > quote?</q></p> > > > > > > In that case why not have <p> auto inert a period then we could have the > following: > > Ryan doesn't like what he's hearing. > > <p>Ryan doesn't like what he's hearing</p> > > > > Ryan > > -- > Web Designer > > > > Web: http://ryanroberts.co.uk > > Email: hello@ryanroberts.co.uk > > Phone: 07759 917 964
Received on Friday, 4 September 2009 22:49:48 UTC