- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 00:52:48 +0000 (GMT)
- To: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
- Cc: Jelks Cabaniss <jelks@jelks.nu>, "www-html@w3.org" <www-html@w3.org>
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Tantek Çelik wrote: > > <quote>: represents just the text of a quotation, NOT including the quotes > surrounding the quotation. Authors are encouraged to use CSS to display the > appropriate quotes around <quote> elements, and user agent SHOULD NOT render > any quotes for <quote> elements by default. If authors are encouraged to add the quotes using CSS, then they are presumably discouraged from putting them in the markup, in which case, how exactly does this differ from <q>? CSS is optional. A document shouldn't suddenly stop making sense because a user has disabled author styles, or is using a UA without CSS support. The way you have described <quote>, it sounds like it _would_ stop making sense: <p>They completed each other's sentences: <quote>Hello</quote> <quote>World</quote></p> ...with author CSS: They completed each other's sentences: "Hello" "World" ...without author CSS: They completed each other's sentences: Hello World ...with author CSS if the UA default rules include quotes, as with <q>: They completed each other's sentences: "Hello" "World" ...without author CSS if the UA default rules include quotes, as with <q>: They completed each other's sentences: "Hello" "World" It seems to me the most accessible is to have the quotes inserted by CSS but have the UA do that by default, just like <strong> is made bold by default but can still be styled using CSS. In other words, exactly what <q> is in HTML4. -- Ian Hickson )\._.,--....,'``. fL "meow" /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. http://index.hixie.ch/ `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 26 September 2002 20:52:49 UTC