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

> From: Jukka K. Korpela []
> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 3:25 PM
> 2013-09-09 22:06, Steve Faulkner wrote:
> >
> >     But within a quotation, whatever the difference might be, it
> >     should be retained simply because it is the right thing (morally,
> >     scientifically, and legally). Whatever is presented as direct
> >     quote should be an exact reproduction of the quoted part of work,
> >     except when changes are necessitated and indicated.
> >
> > So if I copy some text then take that text and put it in a blockquote,
> > without copying the underlying code it includes, it is wrong "
> > (morally, scientifically, and legally)"?
> Yes. Just as it it similarly wrong to quote printed text in a printed book so that
> the use of italic, bolding, or underlining is omitted.

So let me get this straight...

If I come across this (horrible, broken code) on a site:

	<h7>Why did the monkey fall out of the tree?</h7>
	<b><div>He was dead</b>.</div>

Are you saying I cannot correct it when I stuff it into a <blockquote>?

What if the HTML has a barrier to accessibility in it? That can make my site run afoul of legal requirements, which would put me on the hook for litigation/fines in order to not break a... what would I be breaking?

It's certainly, IMO, more immoral to leave something broken for a disabled user than it is to change someone's underlying HTML when I quote it.

If it's not clear, I am not buying into the approach you outline.


Received on Monday, 9 September 2013 20:38:03 UTC