- From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 12:57:30 +0000
Nils Dagsson Moskopp wrote: > Quotations in the context of an article usually consist of three > elements: > > * the actual quote > * the author of the quote > * the citation source > > For two of these parts, there is markup; however, for the author, there > is none. I have no reason to believe that the author is of significantly > less importance than the citation source, and also no reason to assert > that the author is frequently omitted. > > Not really citations (as in for use with the <blockquote> or <q> > element) may be multimedia elements that may or may never have appeared > in any other document: When marking them up, it may be desired to > specify an author but impossible to specify a work. > > Also, there are cases, when the <cite> element isn't applicable, > especially when quoting speech that isn't part of a work (like J. Random > Politicians mutterings). > > Therefore, I am proposing to add an <author> element to the spec. It's not clear what end-user problem you're trying to solve; you'll need to define that first. See the FAQ on feature proposals: http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#Is_there_a_process_for_adding_new_features_to_the_spec.3F Beyond that: one potential use for markup of this sort would be to pull out sources and quotations. This might be for text analysis (e.g. show me all the known quotations in a particular medieval text) or it might be so that you can search to see what people are quoted to have said about something, or what a particular person is quoted to have said. For example: http://www.daylife.com/search/quotes/all/1?q=Daylife (It would be interesting to know whether Daylife would find such markup useful or not.) From the perspective of that use-case, your markup has the deficiency of not specifying any association between an AUTHOR element and one or more Q or BLOCKQUOTE elements. -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Thursday, 18 December 2008 04:57:30 UTC