Le 31 déc. 2006 à 21:39, Anne van Kesteren a écrit :
On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 13:28:44 +0100, Elliotte Harold
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I know the Web has a real problem with source citation,
plagiarism, and giving credit where credit is due. However
removing one of the real tools we have to su
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:
> rhubarb rhubarb rhubarb [Nemo,
> Works, IV]
Idle thought:
|
|
| rhubarb rhubarb rhubarb
| [Nemo, Works, IV]
|
|
The becomes a container that associates elements
with the first child element.
/me shrugs.
Just a thought.
Mike Schinkel wrote:
> Matthew Raymond wrote:
>> Mike Schinkel wrote:
>>> Why should attributes (only?) specify the details of semantics that
>>> elements already possess?
>>Global attributes aren't necessarily wrong if their
>
> By "global" do you simply mean attributes for HTML elements, i.e
At 16:26 + UTC, on 2006-12-31, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:
> Sander Tekelenburg wrote:
[...]
> I assumed Anne meant something like:
>
> rhubarb rhubarb rhubarb [Nemo,
> Works, IV]
Ah. Maybe, that's what he meant, yes. But I don't see how this offers any
advantage over a cite attribute. Qui
Sander Tekelenburg wrote:
> nor do I see how provides a way to have visual metadata
> that does not already. (Not to mention that
> allows authors to provide markup that can be understood by older UAs.)
I assumed Anne meant something like:
rhubarb rhubarb rhubarb [Nemo,
Works, IV]
Which would
At 13:22 +0100 UTC, on 2006-12-31, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
[...]
I'm assuming you're referring to "If a blockquote element is preceeded or
followed by a p element that contains a single cite element and is itself not
preceeded or followed by another blockquote element and does not itself have
a
Hi,
http://ordfajters.se/start/ has an image with a credit ("Foto: Thomas H
Johnsson.") but no caption. Is that a "figure"?
Also, when I think about it, the HTML5 spec itself has a couple of images
which I would classify as "figures"... so perhaps the shouldn't be
required for s.
Regards,
Elliotte Harold wrote:
> It would be nice if user agents would make it a little more available
> without view source (e.g. with a tooltip as they do for acronym titles),
> but regardless more often than not a reader will not want to see the
> text of the cite.
Hmm, tooltips are a bit problemat
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> I saw a recent draft introduced semantics for being followed
> or preceded by a which contains and for which is inside a
> paragraph which also contains a . Perhaps this element can
> contain a single element which contains the source of the quote?
How would
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
You apparently didn't read the part of my proposal of moving the
information cite="" gives to a more visual place. (I think I also
mentioned allowing both if there was a real need for cite="".)
Indeed I missed that, but looking at the archives this doesn't really
cha
On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 13:28:44 +0100, Elliotte Harold
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I know the Web has a real problem with source citation, plagiarism, and
giving credit where credit is due. However removing one of the real
tools we have to support appropriate citation is not going in the right
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
So we can drop the unsupported cite="" attribute from both
and or at least provide a way to have visual metadata. (I'm aware
cite="" is exposed in some way in some user agents, but that's not
really usable in any way...)
It's not just about user agents and their di
I saw a recent draft introduced semantics for being followed
or preceded by a which contains and for which is inside a
paragraph which also contains a . Perhaps this element can
contain a single element which contains the source of the quote?
So we can drop the unsupported cite="" att
13 matches
Mail list logo
