- From: Abigail <abigail@tungsten.gn.iaf.nl>
- Date: Thu, 28 Dec 1995 07:25:10 +0100 (MET)
- To: www-html@w3.org
You, Philippe-Andre Prindeville wrote: ++ ++ On Dec 27, 21:16, Michael Seaton wrote: ++ > bbreak@mit.edu (Ben Breakstone) wrote: ++ > [ snip ] ++ > > I believe the absence of typesetter's (or "curly," or "smart") quotation ++ > > marks from the english HTML entity set to be a grievous omission. ++ > ++ > These could be hinted at in the current standard by using <Q> </Q>. ++ > ++ > However this is still not a full substitute for having entity names, ++ > since there will likely be cases in which a solitary quote is desired. ++ ++ Yes, indeed. You might have several paragraphs all from the same ++ person, with no interruption. In that case, each paragraph would start ++ with a left double quote, but no closing quote would be necessary. ++ So you could make </q> optional, like </p> is. Note: this is ++ highly language dependent. Not all latin scripted languages follow ++ this convention. I know French doesn't, for example. Actually, you cannot not. </p> is optional because the end of a paragraph can be determined from the context. A browser should not display documents differently whether </p> is there or not. Text-level markup, like <q> do not have optional closing tags, as not always their end can not always be determined from the context. So, </q> will always be required. Furthermore, since containers cannot interweave, you cannot have <p><q>...<p>...<p>...</q>. You would need <p><q>...</q> <p><q>...</q>. A final remark, HTML is supposed to be a structure markup language, is the shape of a quote really an HTML issue? How do various quote sound on a speech device? I also think HTML is missing to more important things than the shape of a quote. Abigail
Received on Thursday, 28 December 1995 01:25:24 UTC