- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2008 10:07:31 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Sam Kuper <sam.kuper@uclmail.net>
- Cc: "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>, whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
On Wed, 10 Sep 2008, Sam Kuper wrote: > > In the current HTML5 draft, section 4.4.6 The blockquote element states, > "If a <blockquote> element is preceded or followed by a single paragraph > that contains a single <cite> element and that is itself not preceded or > followed by another blockquote element and does not itself have a <q> > element descendant, then, the title of the work given by that <cite> > element gives the source of the quotation contained in the <blockquote> > element." > > Now, I think that being able to use a <cite> element to give the source > of a <blockquote> element's contents is a useful step forward for HTML, > and I approve of its being introduced in HTML5. > > However, I'm not sure that the criteria for determining the <cite> > element are the best ones, as it looks to me as though they will rule > out a common literary usage of block quotes: using a number of block > quotes from different authors to preface a work or part of a work. Such > usage is evident, for instance, in this book. > > If I understand section 4.4.6 correctly, then having: > > <blockquote>First quote.</blockquote> > <p>First quote's author: <cite>First quote's reference</cite>.</p> > <blockquote>Second quote.</blockquote> > <p>Second quote's author: <cite>Second quote's reference</cite>.</p> > <blockquote>Third quote.</blockquote> > <p>Third quote's author: <cite>Third quote's reference</cite>.</p> > > in an HTML5 file will mean that only the third of these <cite> elements > will be used as the reference for its preceding <blockquote>, because it > is the only one of the three in a single paragraph "that is itself not > preceded or followed by another blockquote element and does not itself > have a <q> element descendant". This strikes me as problematic. How, in > a case like this, should one mark up the block quotes and their > references, without introducing extraneous elements? > > As a preliminary suggestion, perhaps it would be better if the spec > said, "If a <blockquote> element is followed by a single paragraph that > contains a single <cite> element and that is itself not preceded or > followed by another blockquote element and does not itself have a <q> > element descendant, then, the title of the work given by that <cite> > element gives the source of the quotation contained in the <blockquote> > element." It is, after all, normal in English and a number of other > widely-used languages (though I cannot vouch for all languages - perhaps > others will have some useful insights here) for the citation to be given > following a block quote, where one is given. I've removed the offending text. I don't think we can say that quotes should always come before their citations. For example, it's easy to imagine a blog that says: <p><cite>Book The First</cite> says:</p> <blockquote>...from book 1...</blockquote> <p>But <cite>Book The Second</cite> says:</p> <blockquote>...from book 2...</blockquote> ...which is equally problematic. Frankly, I'm not sure this was solving any real problems anyway. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Sunday, 30 November 2008 10:08:08 UTC