Re: is it necessary to disambiguate (using markup) inline notes,citations and original markup? [was] use of <mark> to denote notes in quoted text

Steve Faulkner, Sun, 8 Sep 2013 16:19:45 +0100:

(I started to understand that <mark> was not your real question …)

> Is it necessary to disambiguate (using markup) inline notes and citations
> within quotations?
> Is it necessary to disambiguate code used in quoted text from code added by
> the author doing the quoting?
> please read and the following,
> sections
> My feeling is that the content of a quote is the text not the markup.

Context would have mattered, but if I saw a <mark> within a quotation, 
I would have assumed that the text stemmed from the original source, 
and that the author of the current page had used <mark> to highlight an 
important passage within the quote.

You, OTOH, seem to think that <mark> would be interpreted as a 
*textual* addition. That we don’t agree on the interpretation ought to 
be a hint that cannot be taken for granted, just by looking at the 
element, where the content of the element stems from and thus that 
there should be a *explicit* way for markup up that the content does 
not stem from the original quote. Since is is very common to edit 
quotes, such a thing ought to be quite useful.

Proposal: A <note> or <annotation> element for marking up anything that 
does dot stem to the original source.

Leif H Silli

Received on Sunday, 8 September 2013 15:38:35 UTC