- From: Justin James <j_james@mindspring.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 14:36:21 -0400
- To: "'Sam Kuper'" <sam.kuper@uclmail.net>
- Cc: "'HTML WG'" <public-html@w3.org>
From: public-html-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sam Kuper Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 2:04 PM To: Justin James Cc: HTML WG Subject: Re: <q> 2008/10/29 Justin James <j_james@mindspring.com> >> I think that we all (you, me, Sam) agree that HTML specification should not >> define this behavior, that it is better left to the CSS folks. > > I do *not* agree. Again, please do not put words in my mouth. You have indeed stated that you want this to be defined as a CSS item. So if I understand this correctly (as well as some other things you have said), what you *really* want is: * <q> to be defined in HTML as simply, "denotes a quotation" or something similarly simple (I agree with this, by the way) * The creation of a default CSS styling sheet, in which <q> will be styled with quotes before and after * This default CSS sheet is to be defined and controlled by the people working on HTML, not CSS Is this accurate? >> * Redefine <q> to remove this idea of magic quotes > > By "magic quotes", I believe you mean quotation marks generated by UAs upon encountering > <q> elements.* If so, then I do *not* agree <q> should be redefined to "remove the idea" > of them. I have stated my reasons for this in previous posts. Again, I think that your reasons are a real edge case. I just have not heard any clamor for quotation marks to appear by themselves, anywhere. > <p><q>I'm tired of this,</q> he said.</p> > > is a far more elegant solution, for the reasons expressed in my previous emails in this > thread. This is *only* "elegant" for someone not accustomed to typing quotation marks. It is trivial for an authoring tool to swap quotation marks with " entities. It is not trivial for an authoring tool to figure out where it would be appropriate to replace quotation marks with <q>. This is only of benefit to people hand-authoring the HTML code of actual content, which is a smaller and smaller percentage of the world every day, as more people write things that end up being HTML. >> * Ping the CSS folks and ask them to take up this issue > > If rules for the recommended default presentation of <q> elements end up being codified > in a codex that is referenced by the HTML 5 spec, rather than being incorporated into it > (either option is acceptable to me), then there is the question of which group(s) should > collect and maintain those rules. I certainly have *not* suggested that this task fall on > the shoulders of the CSS WG. The only role in this I feel CSS must have is in providing a > language in which to encode those rules. Other people have, and I believe that it is sensible. As I have stated before, it is quite clear that what you want (a default CSS styling) is not on the horizon for HTML 5 or this group. Very few places in the HTML spec define presentation, except where absolutely necessary, as far as I know. This proposal very much so "breaks" the intent of HTML. > Once more: please do not put words in my mouth. Sorry, I should have replaced the statement that we agreed with "agreed on a number of points". J.Ja
Received on Wednesday, 29 October 2008 18:37:22 UTC