- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 12:50:44 +0000 (UTC)
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005, Rob Mientjes wrote:
> >
> > Well, it would just be for people, vehicles (ships), that kind of
> > thing. I wasn't imagining that people would want to use it for
> > technologies.
>
> Well, a NAME element sounds like it may be used for it (and ambiguous
> naming and spec defining leads to tag abuse, no?).
We don't want any vague spec defining, if anyone sees any, let me know so
we can fix it! :-)
> > Would it make sense to allow it for books? I don't know. Maybe the
> > <cite> element needs a "type" attribute that takes values like
> > "person", "ship", "publication"? What other names do people want to
> > mark up?
I actually meant the <name> element should, although one option is indeed
to co-opt <cite> for this (I don't really like that idea though).
> That feels like something much better. That way, you can talk about
> <cite type="person">Anne van Kesteren</cite>, <cite type="publication"
> (publication sounds a bit vague, maybe something along the lines of
> source?)>A Dao of Web Design</cite> and maybe better something such as
> <cite type="object">Titanic</cite>. This deserves some serious
> attention, cause well, ship is rather silly ;)
Yeah. For <name> that might work better though.
The thing is we don't want to start making people do:
<cite><name type="person">Ian</name></cite> said <q>Hello</q>.
...when all they need to do is write:
Ian said "Hello".
Is there any advantage to marking up people's names?
Maybe we should just let ship names be marked up by <i> (it is, after all,
an instance of use of a term, as it were), and say that <cite> can be used
for any reference to a publication, including those that aren't really
citations ("my favourite book is <cite>...</cite>").
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Saturday, 16 April 2005 05:50:44 UTC