- From: Robert J Burns <rob@robburns.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 16:27:23 +0000
- To: Andrew Sidwell <w3c@andrewsidwell.co.uk>
- Cc: HTML Issue Tracking WG <public-html@w3.org>
Hi Andrew, On May 29, 2008, at 3:48 PM, Andrew Sidwell wrote: > > HTML Issue Tracking Issue Tracker wrote: >> For Q (quotation) and BLOCKQUOTE a 'marks' content markup attribute. >> Permits authors greater control over the separation of concerns of >> styling quotations and specifying the semantics of quotations >> within a >> document. Also allows authors to work around the current state of >> interoperability across popular UAs. >> for more detailed discussion, please consult the wiki page at: http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/AddedAttributeQuotationMarks > > The use-case here is authors wanting to mark up quotes. There are > two plausible ways of implementing it: just choose one and be done > with it. Sure, <q> has interoperability issues, so pressure IE to > fix it or the other browsers to stop using quotes; don't invent a > new attribute to permanently embed this weird situation in the > specification. (Just because other weird things are in now mandated > by the spec doesn't mean that we should keep on adding weird things > to that list.) > > Whilst I appreciate that hypothetically it would be nice for some > people to specify which way they want things, in practice it won't > be a) useful or b) even make a difference to the vast majority of > authors, so increasing implementation complexity for such a tiny > gain seems, well, silly. (See "Solve Real Problems".) I get the feeling you're not taking the time to understand these issues before responding to them. You should understand that this proposal requires zero implementation whatsoever, let alone leading to too much implementation complexity. For those UAs already supporting CSS :before and :after and attribute selectors and content generation, the only thing required is a change to the UAs default stylesheet. How can a minor change to an implementation stylesheet like that possibly trump the needs of authors and users. As for telling authors to make up their mind, that's just silly. There are clearly reasonable arguments for both quotations as punctuation and quotations as a matter of style. This simple proposal meets the needs of both authors while requiring authors happy with the current situation of quotations as matter of style to do nothing with their content. I am quite astonished that this proposal could face any controversy whatsoever. Take care, Rob
Received on Thursday, 29 May 2008 16:28:27 UTC