W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > January 2007

[whatwg] Problems with the definition of <cite>

From: James Graham <jg307@cam.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 12:17:29 +0000
Message-ID: <45ACC259.6070002@cam.ac.uk>
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:
> The /only/ way we will get browsers to display citations in the manner
> expected by the user is with language-sensitive styling of markup that
> differentiates the different components of citations (names, article
> titles, journal titles, page numbers, etc) such as hCite promises to
> provide. The <cite> element alone is far too coarse a tool for this job.

So, to summarise, <cite> is insufficient for extracting useful semantics and has 
a (essentially unchangable) default style which means that it will /at best/ be 
used correctly in English, some of the time, with careful authouring.

You've presented quite a convincing argument to deprecate <cite>.

"Eternity's a terrible thought. I mean, where's it all going to end?"
  -- Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead
Received on Tuesday, 16 January 2007 04:17:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:51 UTC