W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > September 2007

Re: q, quote, blockquote

From: Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 13:43:05 -0500
Message-Id: <1EFB04B3-67F8-448C-B324-0E7B10A8B854@robburns.com>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
To: Charles Hinshaw <charles@everydayrevolution.com>

Hi Charles,

On Sep 10, 2007, at 1:27 PM, Charles Hinshaw wrote:

>> [ suggestion that changing quotation tag names to quotation class  
>> names makes more sense ]
> Just to clarify -- I was absolutely not suggesting that we have a  
> class pre-defined for quotes in any way or that we define any class  
> name.
> In my example, the way that we know that the paragraph is a quote  
> is that it has a cite attribute -- making it a paragraph that cites  
> an outside source. That was actually my suggestion -- that changing  
> quotation tag names to the use of a cite attribute (or combinations  
> of attributes that adequately create a citation) on other existing  
> tags makes more sense.
> It could have had any class... or no class. That part was  
> irrelevant and would be up the the author as it is today.

The problem I see with this approach is that it just doesn't  
distinguish a quotation at all. Adding a cite attribute to an element  
would best indicate an attribution. For example the cite attribute on  
the ins or del elements attributes the insertion or deletion to a  
certain contributor/editor. For XHTML2 and proposed also for HTML5,  
the inclusion of a global cite attribute would permit those sorts of  
attributions on any element. However, there's no way to surmise from  
a n attribution that the attribution is a direct quote a paraphrase  
or simply a loose association of an idea to its originator. The  
difference between a direction quotation and all other attributions  
seems worthy to me of having it's own semantic markup.

Take care,
Received on Monday, 10 September 2007 18:43:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:44:21 UTC