- From: Justin James <j_james@mindspring.com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 08:09:19 -0400
- To: "'Olivier GENDRIN'" <olivier.gendrin@gmail.com>, "'Ben Boyle'" <benjamins.boyle@gmail.com>
- Cc: "'Sam Kuper'" <sam.kuper@uclmail.net>, "'Chris Wilson'" <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, "'HTML WG'" <public-html@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: public-html-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-request@w3.org] On > Behalf Of Olivier GENDRIN > Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 6:33 AM > To: Ben Boyle > Cc: Sam Kuper; Chris Wilson; HTML WG > Subject: Re: <q> > > > On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 1:17 AM, Ben Boyle <benjamins.boyle@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Got a question ... > > > > <p lang="en"><q lang="fr">Bonjour</q> he said.</p> > > > > English or French quotation marks? > > Interesting use case. As far as the sentence is intended to be read by > English speaking people, I think that they await for English > typography marks, so English quotation marks would make sense. But If > we had more nested quotations (French quoted into French quoted into > English), the nested quotation would need French ones (in fact, it > would need the quotation marks used into the outer quoted sentence). > > I think that quotation marks are not part of the quotation, but > outside of it (:before and :after), so the @lang of the quotation mark > is the @lang of the surrounding tag. The more that questions like this come up, the more that it becomes clear to me that <q> is a bad idea. It will never meet the author's needs, or do what they expect it to do, more than "most of the time", which is always a clear sign that something is not right. J.Ja
Received on Tuesday, 28 October 2008 12:10:13 UTC