- From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
- Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 09:45:09 +0000
I've been meaning to send a rambling discussion of annotations to either the www-html or whatwg lists at some point. However, I would vehemently stress that it is not that uncommon for notes and marginalia to themselves have notes or marginalia, and it would seem particularly odd to allow that in the limited space of paper but not the free expanse of hypertext. When an author cannot got hold of a work herself, she must sometimes cite a citation of that work in second work. This is what the abbreviation cit. is for. And sometimes a citation refers to more than one version of a work. Here's an example out of the Oxford Style Guide: J. D. Denniston, /The Greek Particles/ (Oxford, 1934; citations are from the 2nd edn., 1954). Without more clarity (and that partly means examples) on how <cite /> should apply to the complexity of real academic citations, I'd avoid making the assumption that <cite /> cannot contain <cite /> -- for now. Unfortunately for us, the all-important bibliographic microformat is still at a brainstorming and data collection stage: http://microformats.org/wiki/citation -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Thursday, 30 November 2006 01:45:09 UTC