W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2008

Re: Marking Up Poetry

From: Philip Taylor (Webmaster) <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 19:03:12 +0000
Message-ID: <47C70570.2090902@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
To: "Dr. Olaf Hoffmann" <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
CC: public-html@w3.org

I'm reluctant to enter into this debate, yet
feel strangely compelled so to do.  I would like
to ask Dr Hoffmann a few questions.  Dr Hoffman,
do you believe that poetry should be intrinsically
supported by HTML 5 ?  And if so, would you
prefer that certain new, poetry-oriented, elements
be included in the HTML 5 language, or would you
prefer that some existing elements be overloaded ?

If you /do/ feel that poetry is a special case,
and deserves instrinsic support, do you also
feel that there are other special cases that
have not (yet) been addressed ?  Would you,
for example, like to see dramatic scripts
supported ?  Legal contracts ?  Bus timetables ?
Telephone directories ?  Each of these seems
to me to be as worthy of intrinsic support as
poetry, yet there are (as far as I can tell)
no members of the HTML 5 Working Group
clammering for their inclusion.  So the key question,
for me at least, is "what is it about poetry that
causes you to regard it as a special case ?" (assuming
that you do).  If you could explain this, it
might help those, like myself, who feel some sympathy
for your cause, yet who do not wish to see the
HTML 5 language either abused (by overloading
existing elements with new, unrelated, meanings)
or enlarged to the point where it would require
a dictionary or an encyclopaedia of elements before
one could use it successfully, to better understand
your position.

Sincerely : Philip TAYLOR
Received on Thursday, 28 February 2008 19:03:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:30 UTC