Re: suggestion for tag set <sarcasm> </sarcasm> pair

On 4 November 2014 08:16, Jukka K. Korpela <jukka.k.korpela@kolumbus.fi>
wrote:

> there is no such benefit, since CSS is expressive enough.


The addition of role/label was at the request of a friend for whom CSS was
not expressive.

(I’m not sure whether role=note is an adequate example here. It indicates
> “A section whose content is parenthetic or ancillary to the main content of
> the resource.” I don’t think that’s accurate for a sarcastic remark in
> general, and I don’t see what it would benefit. Regarding @aria-label, as
> far as I can see, it is mainly intended for text that acts a label for a
> control-like element that otherwise lacks a textual label. The @title
> attribute is more widely supported, but using it is somewhat illogical too.
> And if you really want that everyone surely gets the idea that a remark is
> sarcastic, you should precede it with “Sarcasm:” in the real—not
> generated—content, or maybe follow it with “(The preceding remark was
> sarcastic.)”.)
>

sure, if you can think of a better way to express the semantics I urge you
to do any of the following:
1. file issues https://github.com/stevefaulkner/5-sarcasm/issues
2. fork and change , submit pull requests if desired.
3. create an alternative sarcasm design pattern in some form

*May a million semantic constructs bloom!*
--

Regards

SteveF
HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>