Re: ISSUE-48: UA-q-quotes - suggest closing on 2009-09-03

As consensus was reached in last week's telcon to close Issue-48, I've 
filed two bug reports as promised. (q element) (blockquote)


Martin Kliehm wrote:
> Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>> ISSUE-48: UA-q-quotes - Should user-agents generate quotes for the q 
>> element
>> This issue raises two complaints: (a) the draft instructs authors to 
>> add quotes to Q elements manually; and (b) the draft makes no clear 
>> user-agent recommendation regarding blockquote. I believe both of 
>> these issues are now addressed, and the interoperability issue with Q 
>> is addressed. The rendering section now requires that user agents add 
>> quotes to Q elements:
>> Since rendering is generally specified and BLOCKQUOTE doesn't require 
>> adding quotes, it should be assumed UAs are expected not to add 
>> quotes, as would be consistent with existing practice.
>> Thus, I believe the problems raised by this issue are solved in 
>> current drafts. I suggest closing.
> a) The current draft 
> ( says:
> Quotation punctuation (such as quotation marks) must not appear 
> immediately before, after, or inside q elements; they will be inserted 
> into the rendering by the user agent.
> I think this could be phrased less ambiguous along the line of this:
> Authors SHOULD not use quotation punctuation (such as quotation marks) 
> immediately before, after, or inside q elements, because user agents 
> MUST insert them into the rendering, unless the default rendering is 
> overridden by CSS.
> b) The current draft 
> ( ) 
> doesn't have any recommendations regarding the blockquote element. I'd 
> suggest:
> [...] Content inside a blockquote must be quoted from another source, 
> whose address, if it has one, should be cited in the cite attribute. 
> [NEW]User agents MUST NOT insert quotation punctuation (such as 
> quotation marks) into the rendering.[/NEW]
> I'd appreciate if any people who are more experienced than me would 
> shape this text into something that is suited to go into a draft. When 
> the current draft is reflecting some wording to that effect I wouldn't 
> object closing Issue-48, but I think amending is necessary before that 
> can be done.

Received on Thursday, 3 September 2009 15:20:12 UTC