- From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 11:55:50 +0100
- To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Cc: "Jukka K. Korpela" <jukka.k.korpela@kolumbus.fi>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CA+ri+VmhWq-9Whs6NLkKGdTp=Or-yz9bU21+Tck_LPprh1ztPQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Leif, thanks for doing a thorough sift, its useful, >An examination of your file,[1] hints that that is a wildly exaggerated >claim: OK :-) so how about a good number ignore. >Btw, why not also investigate pre-HTML5 pages? I used the HTML5 subset as I had it on hand and considered it to be most likely the freshest, but feel free to review a wider sample the data and newer larger samples are available at http://webdevdata.org -- Regards SteveF HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> On 20 August 2013 00:35, Leif Halvard Silli < xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> wrote: > Steve Faulkner, Mon, 19 Aug 2013 15:04:12 +0100: > > > .i.e. removing restrictions to use currently in the spec and which most > > authors ignore anyway > > An examination of your file,[1] hints that that is a wildly exaggerated > claim: > > If we ignore, ”naked” (classless) elements (except <cite> and > <footer>), then the documents you dug up appears to contains 171 > instances of ”source meta data” inside <blockquote> elements, versus > 126 instances of ”source meta data” outside (in elements adjacent to) > <blockquote>. Thus ”inside blockquote” was used 57% of the time, while > “outside blockquote” was used 43% of the time. > > In more detail, for accuracy: In your files, I found 1389 nonempty (and > non-JavaScript code) occurrences of blockquote. Out of these, then, the > instances of “inside <blockuote>” looked as follows: > > 1) 19 <footer>s, several of which were from same web sites/authors > 2) 123 <cite> (5 of which were child of <footer>, and 2 of which > where child of an element of class "author".) > 3) 36 occurrences of class="author" on various child elements of > <blockquote>. > 4) Some last-child “naked” elements (without @class) or <cite>, > were used to designate metadata/authors. Amongst these were > 3 <address> elements, all of which contained a <cite>. > > Regarding inside <blockquote>, I also observed: > > A) 41 occurences of <h1>-<h6> elements and 6 of <section>, > proving that outlines occur, in the wild, in <blockquote>. > B) 7 occurences of <header> elements. > C) Some of the blockquote elements were inappropriate as they were > used for styling or for other “practical” reasons, like indent. > > The instances of *adjacent* to <blockquote>, looked as follows: > > a) There were 68 occurrences of class=aut(hor) outside blockquote, > typically on an element right after (adjacent to) the blockquote. > b) There were 58 <cite> outside <blockquote>, all/most of which > were used to attribute the author of the quote. > c) There were some 'naked' (classless) adjacent elements after the > blockquote element were used to provide the name of the author. > > Btw, why not also investigate pre-HTML5 pages? > > [1] https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/377471/blockquote.html > -- > leif halvard silli
Received on Tuesday, 20 August 2013 10:57:02 UTC