Henri Sivonen ha scritto:
On Nov 30, 2008, at 18:38, Calogero Alex Baldacchino wrote:
I'm not sure I'm understanding the whole function of the <cite> element,
[...]
Q: What problem does it solve?
The <cite> element solves the problem that if one considers <i> evil
(I don't) and one wants to conform to the Chicago Manual of Style and
one believes that <em> is semantically wrong for titles of work,
without <cite> there wouldn't be an appropriate element for
italicizing titles of work per CMoS in a way that doesn't depend on
CSS being available.
I apologize for the confusion I've introduced in the discussion. The
question was referred to what I was suggesting (as if I was expecting
someone to ask me that). The overall point is: define a <cite> with an
id to describe the whole source, anchor any proper <blocquote> to it, if
this make sense for interaction and referencing, then, if you need to
re-cite the source you can do it in a shorter fashion, and using an <i>
- if you like - or a <cite> without an id (since the wanted unambigous
relationship has yet been set) but perhaps with a class (if you wish to
style it through stlye sheets), and anyway to tell a CSS-unaware user
agent what it is. I hope now that's more clear (I'd hope that was useful
too, but I leave it out to other contributors and whatwg members).
--
Email.it, the professional e-mail, gratis per te: http://www.email.it/f
Sponsor:
Vuoi scoprire come sta la tua pensione? Ricevi un check up gratuito da
EurizonVita
Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid=8419&d=30-11
