Re: Alternate Additional Attribute Set for a Single Quote Element

On 02/08/07, Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com> wrote:
>
dp.

> > I think that argument is flawed, relying on structure rather than
> > markup?
> > I don't believe it addressed the inline vs block usage that Gregory
> > enables
> > explicitly via markup.
>
> My proposal relies on the structure of the markup. So it does rely on
> markup.

I differentatiate between markup, explicit to contained content (Gregory's
proposal) and the relationship between markup (xpath expressions)
that you propose.



> <q><p>Many authors use improper markup using divs as their only block
> level division.</p></q>
> The above is block level and would be returned from the DOM API that
> way and made available as a CSS class selector.

An algorithm would suppose that was the intent, is that correct?


> > Also, relying on the appropriate codepoint for quotes could result
> > in confusion
> > depending on the editor used.
>
> Again, my proposal does not rely on the code point at all. It relies
> on the markup contained within the Q or QUOTE (or even BLOCKQUOTE)
> elements.

Sorry, I refer to the use of the quote character which you mentioned.


>
> The only thing that would be added by explicit attributes (as Gregory
> suggested) would be the possibility of an incongruence between the
> contents of the element and the value set for the attribute. For
> example:
>
> <quote type="inline" ><p>Many authors use improper markup using divs
> as their only block level division.</p></quote>
>
> This would be errant markup.
Errant? Invalid to the schema? I don't think XML defines 'errant' markup.



>
> > I think SGML / XML should use markup rather than structure to infer
> > semantics.
>
> I agree. The code points I refer to is to deal with the situation
> where authors want to include quotation marks in their markup.
For which, CSS should be used? It is either decoration / style or content.
In this case I'd suggest decoration.


> That's the only reason I introduce the specific Unicode code points.

Sorry, I misinterpreted.

regards

-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk

Received on Thursday, 2 August 2007 07:52:23 UTC