- From: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 16:56:11 -0400
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Oli Studholme <whatwg.org at boblet.net> wrote: > <blockquote> > ?<p>[block quote]</p> > ?<footer>? <cite><a href="?">[title of work]</a></cite></footer> > </blockquote> This is incorrect according to the current definition of <footer>. > Footer definition: > ??The footer element represents a footer for its nearest ancestor > sectioning content or sectioning root element. A footer typically > contains information about its section such as who wrote it, links to > related documents, copyright data, and the like.? This means it's tied to the nearest <section> or <article> or such. It's not supposed to be specifically related to any other type of ancestor, like <blockquote>. > Simon felt that ?Content inside a blockquote must be quoted from > another source? excludes footer. However the footer definition reads > to me that footer is basically metadata *about* content (the > non-footer or -header content of the sectioning or sectioning root > element). Correct, but it's supposed to be metadata about the whole section, not about just its parent. However, I don't know if there's any specific way to mark this up. It's a common pattern, so it would be a good candidate for adding here: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/links.html#common-idioms-without-dedicated-elements It's useful to be able to put the author info in its own element so that you can style it differently.
Received on Thursday, 30 June 2011 13:56:11 UTC