- From: James Graham <jg307@cam.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 09:25:16 +0100
- To: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Cc: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@formsPlayer.com>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Karl Dubost wrote: > "The cite attribute may be used to specify a URI > that explains the change. When that document is > long, for instance the minutes of a meeting, > authors are encouraged to include a fragment > identifier pointing to the specific part of that > document that discusses the change." > > Proposal > > "The cite attribute may be used to specify a URI > that explains the change. Authoring tools and CMS > (ex. wiki, weblogs, cvslog) can link to a > document explaining the changes. When that > document is long, for instance the minutes of a > meeting, authors or authoring tools are > encouraged to include a fragment identifier > pointing to the specific part of that document > that discusses the change." > > Example: > In the wikipedia article about Venus, differences could be shown with > ins and del and gives a pointer to the message "(added NASA image)". > http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Venus&diff=293914&oldid=293913 Is there a reason this would be better than a plain <a>, perhaps as the child of the <ins> or <del> elements? I can see several advantages of using <a> - principally that it is well understood by all UAs - and no obvious disadvantages. -- "Mixed up signals Bullet train People snuffed out in the brutal rain" --Conner Oberst
Received on Thursday, 18 October 2007 08:25:24 UTC