Re: Marking Up Poetry

Peter Krantz 08-02-28 14.42:   ­
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 11:43 AM, Dr. Olaf Hoffmann
> <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de> wrote:
> >  My own vocabulary will have no influence on the presentation, therefore
> >  this approach does not meet the requirements as noted on the wiki page.
>
> Why do you want to mix markup with presentation? HTML with CSS (aural
> and visual) will provide the information ot the user agent on how to
> present it. I am guessing that you, as the poet, would want to be able
> to influence the presentation rather than being forced by user agents?
>   

HTML has always had default stylings. The default styling has the 
function of "back-up" styling. The "back-up" styling should be 
relatively meaningful, in itself. As is the case with <em>, <h1>, <h2> etc.

In other words, there is no mix of markup and presentation here. Anymore 
than anywhere else in HTML 5. And the default styling for poetry would 
of course not affect how one could use CSS to style as one wishes.

> >  There is a need for a predefined vocabulary with well implemented
> >  behaviour in user-agents.
> >
>
> Centrally defined and controlled domain specific vocabularies are
> difficult to establish. Why do you think poetry should be added but
> not law, cooking, shipping or animal husbandry? "Well implemented
> behaviour in user agents" is not controlled by the HTML WG.
>   

When we discuss HTML 5, how it will look in browsers seems to be 
central. Just consider the difficult choice of a caption element for 
<figure>. Or even the <figure> element itself. And one of the things 
that spoke for <dialog> seemed to be that it was realatively simple to 
get to work in today's browsers.

But why don't you ask why the <dialog> elment was added? Allready there 
were several ways of marking up quotes and cites.  Why are dialogs so 
important - compared with poetry, law, cooking, shipping, animal husbandry?
-- 
leif halvard silli

Received on Thursday, 28 February 2008 19:45:45 UTC