- From: Dr. Olaf Hoffmann <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
- Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 18:25:51 +0100
- To: public-html@w3.org
I think, the section 6 contains improper markup (and problematic content). Poetry or a stanza/strophe is embedded in a p element. The current draft of HTML5 as previous versions of HTML notes, that p represents a paragraph. Paragraphs are prose and no poetry and cannot contain any substructures like strophe-lines. My suggestion is to use either another format to markup literature/text properly or to use divs with RDFa or some other mechanism to indicate the role of the divs. Especially for a non visual representation it is for many people pretty confusing/depressing, if poetry is presented as prose (I know this personally, because one of my nephews tends to recite poetry much like prose ;o) Another problem may occur with the relation of h1, h2, image and stanza. The current order implies more or less, that Alfred Lord Tennyson is the author of the poem, the image and the alternative text - is this really true? Some metadata (RDF) might be necessary to put the relations correct. This problem is only slightly better handled with example 6.2 due to the hyperlink (not only because it points to an error 404 page). According to wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lady_of_Shalott the image seems to show a replication of an image of John William Waterhouse, not from Alfred Lord Tennyson, while the alternative text is maybe from another person, what means, it is effectively an interpretation of the image, not neccessarily representing the intentions of the image author. Still it can be an alternative for the image, however not related directly to the author of the poem or the image... Is there a mechanism currently to relate metadata to the value of an attribute like alt? If not, it might be better to replace the old img with a new element with the possibility to contain the alternative text as element content, including metadata about the content ;o) The sample seems to be already old enough to be public domain, therefore it is at least not really problematic for the draft to blur all these relations. However, if the sample is intended to be useful for current works, one has to put those relations somewhere due to copyright restrictions - and even without, I think, the works of authors should be always honoured by putting the relations correctly. Related discussion about the poetry problem of HTML in the wiki: http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/PoeticSemantics Olaf
Received on Monday, 18 January 2010 17:28:27 UTC