Re: [whatwg] details == footnote ?
[Oops. Resending to list.] On Apr 24, 2007, at 18:09, Elliotte Harold wrote: Is the details element a generalization of footnotes/endnotes? For instance would it be appropriate to render a details element as a footnote or endnote? Would it be appropriate to encode a footnote or endnote as a details element in which the footnote marker was the legend? My understanding is that its purpose is to mark up parts of application UI that are behind a disclosure triangle. Footnotes, on the other hand, are visible by default. -- Henri Sivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Re: [whatwg] sarcasm
On Tuesday, April 24, 2007 9:34 PM David Walbert wrote On Apr 24, 2007, at 9:19 PM, Jon Barnett wrote: That could also apply to other tones of voice where context doesn't make it obvious, such as irony, anger, suspicion, elation, and veiled threats. But if you mark it up, it won't be a veiled threat anymore. No it won't but it might help somebody else translate your work into another language. A couple of thoughts -- a. I rather like this sort of thing -- I wrote a note to the HTML WG a month or so ago (in reflection on the debate -- no I am not trying to reopen that) about a variety of allied issues: graphemic, pronunciation-related, and semantic http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007JanMar/0458.html . It may have not been the proper audience, or perhaps it will become a part of the standard, or maybe it was just plain dumb, I am not sure yet. b. The W3C has a "reasoning with uncertainty" incubator WG. I would be quite uncertain myself in making any proper explanation of what they do. But I can say it looks pretty worthwhile and at least tangentially relevant to the markup of "authorial intent" which itself can go a long way toward exposing those inferences that can be appropriately associated with our utterances. c. Consider a non-normative (descriptive) study of all those "odd" orthographic conventions that people have invented (including cross cultural and historical studies of punctuation) leading up to modern markup -related neologisms (including such things as -; and ) . Such studies might help to expose (for example) the different contextual meanings of parenthesis -- back in grad school some 30+ years ago I counted something like 10 different meanings of parentheses in running English text) . These would all be good studies I think. Such analyses would help bridge the gap between semantics1 (as used by humans) and semantics2 (as used by compilers and interpreters) and could bring value to any new markups that seek to empower humans to express themselves with clarity. example: "when I speak of ambiguity, I speak with no ambiguity" d. Folks who appear to represent some of the other WG's within W3C seem to be receptive to these sorts of discussions of what we might call "markup of authorial intent." cheers, David Dailey
Re: [whatwg] sarcasm
On Apr 24, 2007, at 9:19 PM, Jon Barnett wrote: That could also apply to other tones of voice where context doesn't make it obvious, such as irony, anger, suspicion, elation, and veiled threats. But if you mark it up, it won't be a veiled threat anymore. :-) _ David Walbert LEARN NC, UNC-Chapel Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[whatwg] sarcasm
I think sarcasm is a good case for "class extensions" http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/ClassExtensions That could also apply to other tones of voice where context doesn't make it obvious, such as irony, anger, suspicion, elation, and veiled threats.
Re: [whatwg] sarcasm
Le 25 avr. 2007 à 08:19, Elliotte Harold a écrit : Alexey Feldgendler wrote: In Western typography, there is already a tradition to mark up irony with quotation marks: Yeah, George W. Bush has been such a “great” president. There's an even stronger tradition to mark quotes with quotation marks, and yet we have the q element. Because quote is useful not because of his punctuation but because of the possibility to give the reference of the quote. Raymond Queneau said: " cite="http://www.evene.fr/celebre/biographie/raymond- queneau-551.php?citations"> Toute forme de langage devrait être reconnue et libre d'exister sans ironie. " -- Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/ W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/ *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Re: [whatwg] sarcasm
That, I'm afraid, would take away all of the fun of being sarcastic in the first place. - James Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote: > [snip] > It would be interesting if such a new element would provide a > method of specifying the real meaning. > > For example... > > > That's huge! > > > [snip]
Re: [whatwg] sarcasm
Hello, On 4/24/07, Elliotte Harold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Alexey Feldgendler wrote: > In Western typography, there is already a tradition to mark up irony > with quotation marks: > > Yeah, George W. Bush has been such a "great" president. There's an even stronger tradition to mark quotes with quotation marks, and yet we have the q element. It would be interesting if such a new element would provide a method of specifying the real meaning. For example... That's huge! See ya -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/
Re: [whatwg] sarcasm
So why not use the q element for irony as well, since a quote already indicates both quotations and irony. On 4/24/07, Elliotte Harold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Alexey Feldgendler wrote: > In Western typography, there is already a tradition to mark up irony > with quotation marks: > > Yeah, George W. Bush has been such a "great" president. There's an even stronger tradition to mark quotes with quotation marks, and yet we have the q element. -- Elliotte Rusty Harold [EMAIL PROTECTED] Java I/O 2nd Edition Just Published! http://www.cafeaulait.org/books/javaio2/ http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0596527500/ref=nosim/cafeaulaitA/
Re: [whatwg] sarcasm
Alexey Feldgendler wrote: In Western typography, there is already a tradition to mark up irony with quotation marks: Yeah, George W. Bush has been such a “great” president. There's an even stronger tradition to mark quotes with quotation marks, and yet we have the q element. -- Elliotte Rusty Harold [EMAIL PROTECTED] Java I/O 2nd Edition Just Published! http://www.cafeaulait.org/books/javaio2/ http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0596527500/ref=nosim/cafeaulaitA/
[whatwg] Parsing: < in unquoted attribute values
The parsing section says that < in an unquoted attribute value terminates
the tag. However, according to my testing[1], IE7, Gecko, Opera and Webkit
don't do this -- they append the < to the attribute value. So I think the
parsing section is wrong here.
Relevant part of the spec:
Attribute value (unquoted) state
Consume the next input character:
[...]
U+003C LESS-THAN SIGN (<)
EOF
Parse error. Emit the current tag token. Reconsume the character
in the data state.
s/U+003C LESS-THAN SIGN (<)//
Additionally, the syntax section says that authors are not allowed to use
< in unquoted attribute values, which should probably be changed if the
parsing section is changed.
Relevant part of the spec:
Unquoted attribute value syntax
The attribute name, followed by zero or more space characters,
followed by a single U+003D EQUALS SIGN character, followed by zero
or more space characters, followed by the attribute value, which, in
addition to the requirements given above for attribute values, must
not contain any literal space characters, U+003E GREATER-THAN SIGN
(>) characters, or U+003C LESS-THAN SIGN (<) characters, and must
not, furthermore, start with either a literal U+0022 QUOTATION MARK
(") character or a literal U+0027 APOSTROPHE (') character.
s/, U+003E/, or U+003E/
s/, or U+003C LESS-THAN SIGN (<) characters//
[1] http://simon.html5.org/test/html/parsing/tokenisation/unquoted/
--
Simon Pieters
Re: [whatwg] sarcasm
Marking up emotions and tones is an interesting idea, especially when you consider the potential for talking browsers like Opera and Fire Vox. But the general utility of marking up sarcasm is somewhat broader than that for marking other emotions and tones, because sarcasm is /especially/ likely to be misinterpreted. Hence the popularity of the phrase: "I was being sarcastic". The crux of misunderstanding here is that words are used in such a way as to undermine their surface meaning. You can undermine your own words more or less explicitly. On the one hand, you can give your audience no formal clues and depend entirely on common notions shared with audience (say, about the excellence of US presidents) for your disavowal to be detected, as with deadpan sarcasm and a lot of satire. Alternatively, you can rely on various conventions to modify the meaning of what is said, such as a nasal tone of voice, "air quotes", and "scare quotes". For this more explicit disavowal, TEI includes a fabulous element: http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/html/ref-soCalled.html I suspect that the implicit and explicit variations reflect authorial intent and are not merely incidental. For that reason, I doubt markup would be appropriate for the implicit form. But markup could certainly be work well for the explicit variation. Talking browsers and screen readers offer a good justification for using markup in addition to punctuation for sarcasm. In Western languages at least, it is only through markup that can they clearly distinguish direct speech, quotation, and sarcasm, and assign them different voices. Quotation punctuation is far more fluid and ambiguous than other punctuation like commas, semicolons, question marks, full stops, and exclamation marks. So Alexey's analogy with how we treat more reliable punctuation is problematic. -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis Alexey Feldgendler wrote: On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 22:18:23 +0200, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: It occurs to me that one of the most frequently used nits of pseudo-markup is to indicate sarcasm. For example, Yeah, George W. Bush has been such a great president. Should we perhaps formalize this? Is there any benefit to be achieved by adding an explicit sarcasm element to HTML? In Western typography, there is already a tradition to mark up irony with quotation marks: Yeah, George W. Bush has been such a “great” president. I don't think a structural markup is required for something that has a punctuation tradition, just like we don't introduce structural markup for sentences (the punctuation, such as a full stop after the sentence, suffices). Also... I've heard that Ethiopian Semitic languages and French actually has a punctuation mark for sarcasm. There was such an idea, but it hasn't been widely adopted. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony_mark
Re: [whatwg] sarcasm
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 22:18:23 +0200, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: It occurs to me that one of the most frequently used nits of pseudo-markup is to indicate sarcasm. For example, Yeah, George W. Bush has been such a great president. Should we perhaps formalize this? Is there any benefit to be achieved by adding an explicit sarcasm element to HTML? In Western typography, there is already a tradition to mark up irony with quotation marks: Yeah, George W. Bush has been such a “great” president. I don't think a structural markup is required for something that has a punctuation tradition, just like we don't introduce structural markup for sentences (the punctuation, such as a full stop after the sentence, suffices). Also... I've heard that Ethiopian Semitic languages and French actually has a punctuation mark for sarcasm. There was such an idea, but it hasn't been widely adopted. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony_mark -- Alexey Feldgendler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [ICQ: 115226275] http://feldgendler.livejournal.com
Re: [whatwg] sarcasm
Hello, On 4/24/07, Arne Johannessen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Elliotte Harold wrote: > It occurs to me that one of the most frequently used nits of pseudo- > markup is to indicate sarcasm. I do like the idea of formalising that -- but considering the way the sarcasm element occasionally is used in emails, we may find it necessary to make its start tag optional... ;-) Yeah... like the winking smiley, the lone "" seems to be used more like a punctuation mark (than markup) at times. See ya -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/
Re: [whatwg] sarcasm
Elliotte Harold wrote: It occurs to me that one of the most frequently used nits of pseudo- markup is to indicate sarcasm. I do like the idea of formalising that -- but considering the way the sarcasm element occasionally is used in emails, we may find it necessary to make its start tag optional... ;-) -- Arne Johannessen
Re: [whatwg] sarcasm
Hello, On 4/24/07, Elliotte Harold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: It occurs to me that one of the most frequently used nits of pseudo-markup is to indicate sarcasm. For example, Yeah, George W. Bush has been such a great president. Should we perhaps formalize this? Is there any benefit to be achieved by adding an explicit sarcasm element to HTML? An interesting proposal. Some other things to consider is some of the other ways people mark up sarcasm. Some people mark it with a winking smiley. As in... ;-) Or... ;) Although, this tends to be when a person is being sarcastic to be funny or to tease someone. I don't believe I've ever seen (or used myself) the winking smiley when I'm being sarcastic AND I'm trying to be mean to the person, to in a heated argument. (I.e., using sarcasm to "make a point".) Also... I've heard that Ethiopian Semitic languages and French actually has a punctuation mark for sarcasm. See ya -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/
Re: [whatwg] sarcasm
Elliotte Harold wrote: It occurs to me that one of the most frequently used nits of pseudo-markup is to indicate sarcasm. For example, Yeah, George W. Bush has been such a great president. Should we perhaps formalize this? Is there any benefit to be achieved by adding an explicit sarcasm element to HTML? Seems rather culturally specific. I found from living in Boston for a while, that a British sense of humour often seems harsher and more sarcastic to our gentle US cousins. So I wouldn't burn this into an element name. Some way of citing externally maintained lists might be nice, eg. see work of http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/emotion/charter ""The mission of the Emotion Incubator Group, part of the Incubator Activity, is to investigate the prospects of defining a general-purpose Emotion annotation and representation language, which should be usable in a large variety of technological contexts where emotions need to be represented."" cheers, Dan
[whatwg] sarcasm
It occurs to me that one of the most frequently used nits of pseudo-markup is to indicate sarcasm. For example, Yeah, George W. Bush has been such a great president. Should we perhaps formalize this? Is there any benefit to be achieved by adding an explicit sarcasm element to HTML? -- Elliotte Rusty Harold [EMAIL PROTECTED] Java I/O 2nd Edition Just Published! http://www.cafeaulait.org/books/javaio2/ http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0596527500/ref=nosim/cafeaulaitA/
[whatwg] details == footnote ?
Is the details element a generalization of footnotes/endnotes? For instance would it be appropriate to render a details element as a footnote or endnote? Would it be appropriate to encode a footnote or endnote as a details element in which the footnote marker was the legend? -- Elliotte Rusty Harold [EMAIL PROTECTED] Java I/O 2nd Edition Just Published! http://www.cafeaulait.org/books/javaio2/ http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0596527500/ref=nosim/cafeaulaitA/
