- From: Jukka Korpela <jkorpela@cc.hut.fi>
- Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 07:53:40 +0200 (EET)
- To: www-html@w3.org
On 20 Jan 1998, Peter Flynn wrote: > Correct. CITE is an original Berners-Lee element, I think: it's been > there from the very beginning. Yes, it's contained at least in the June 1993 draft for HTML (which is roughly what people mean by "HTML 1.0" I suppose, although the document itself does _not_ carry that name), http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/draft-ietf-iiir-html-01.txt On the other hand, CITE has never been defined adequately. By "adequate" I mean a formulation which is understandable to the Internet community without assumed knowledge of the nuances of the English language as used by native speakers. I'd say that people have more often misunderstood CITE as being for quotations than got the intended meaning. I wouldn't have got it right without patient explanations from helpful people. I consulted quite a many dictionaries and they all described "cite" more or less synonymous with "quote". Therefore, in a specification intended for a worldwide audience, some wording more descriptive than just "citation" would be needed. Well, a reader of HTML 4.0 spec has better chances to get it right than a reader of the HTML 3.2 spec, due to the presence of the Q element; when I read HTML 3.2, CITE looked just like the text-level counterpart of BLOCKQUOTE. Yucca, http://www.hut.fi/u/jkorpela/
Received on Tuesday, 20 January 1998 00:53:58 UTC