- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 08:15:03 +0200
- To: Smylers <Smylers@stripey.com>
- CC: HTMLWG <public-html@w3.org>
Smylers On 09-09-11 02.16: > Leif Halvard Silli writes: >> Smylers On 09-09-11 00.16: >>> Leif Halvard Silli writes: >> Isn't <code> any useful since it can be used for all kinds of code? > > All kinds of code are typically presented in the same way -- for > example, a typewritery font. So <code> usefully, and correctly, conveys > generally codeyness to users, for all kinds of code; it isn't precise, > but nor is it misleading. If names needs no special styling, then why do you think it needs need to be contrasted (via styling) from /work/ sources? Can't users discern name and work just be reading the content, as they do for <code>? > Whereas you're proposing <cite> to have two distinct purposes. HTML 5, as currently defined, builds two purposes for <cite> right into the spec: It can be used to refer to sources, but it can also be used for works that aren't sources. HTML 4, by contrast, defines only one role for cite - source/authority markup. Btw, I just checked the last book of my fav author. It has a person register. And no index register. Roughly none of the names in the text flow are rendered in italics. But all "work" sources are rendered in italics. But *only* the first time they occur. I have not heard anything from you, or seen it in the draft, that <cite> should only be use the /first/ time a work is pointed to. It sounds, from you, as if every occurrences of a reference to a source could be marked up with <cite>. That I disagree with. <cite> comes across as something that /reminds/ about <dfn> in that <cite> has "defining instance power". Whether you use <cite> about person sources or work sources, you cannot simply use it 100% of the time. The usual thing - and this goes for <dfn> also - is to distinguish the name of the source the first time it is introduced, and to give context (aka description/definition) on that occasion. -- leif halvard silli
Received on Wednesday, 16 September 2009 06:15:43 UTC