- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 22:12:54 -0400
Matthew Thomas wrote: > Ian Hickson wrote: > >> On Thu, 14 Apr 2005, Anne van Kesteren wrote: >> ... >> >>> <q>foo bar and then <cite>Ian</cite> said: >>> <blockquote> >>> <p>Well, I don't want to go into details right now...</p> >>> <p>... but this looks like a very ugly markup construct...</p> >>> </blockquote> >>> however, he was of course wrong, as this kind of nesting is actually >>> kind a cool, not?</q> >>> >>> ..? It looks terrible imho. Not something you put inline or so. >> >> There have actually been examples of this in this in the past few >> weeks, enough to convince me that in some cases it is a valid use case. > > As far as I can see, all the supporting examples have been provided by > yourself, and none of them are conformant to basic typography. (This is > given away partly by your starting the supposedly resumed outer > paragraph with "....".) In other words, any written work attempting such > constructions would be marked as an error by a human editor. I have in front of me several examples of in-paragraph block quotes in which multiple, unrelated sentences are quoted; in which several stanzas of a poem are quoted; in which a paragraph has been quoted in its entirety (and therefore leaving it out of a <p> would be just as wrong as leaving a single-paragraph HTML document without its <p>); and in which, yes, multiple paragraphs have been quoted. Some of the quotations are introduced by the previous sentence, others complete the introductory sentence, and still others break in the middle of the sentence. All of these examples are in print, and have therefore passed through the review of a professional editor. > So if <p>s inside <p>s are allowed, I think it should be only for <p > lang="en-hixie">. I disagree. ~fantasai
Received on Friday, 15 April 2005 19:12:54 UTC