[whatwg] [web-apps] 2.7.8 The i element
Anne van Kesteren
fora at annevankesteren.nl
Sun Apr 17 10:58:59 PDT 2005
Ian Hickson wrote:
> That's the problem. Would abusing <cite> for this be acceptable? Do we
> need another element?
I think that would be acceptable. Although I wonder if CITE would still
be the right name... Can you still use CITE for persons in that case?
<p><cite>John E. Simpson</cite> said in <cite>XPath and
> I don't particularly plan on ever linking to a urn:, since the likelihood
> of their being successfully dereferenced is extremely low. I don't think
> that's really a workable solution.
It is also not really backwards compatible. (However, you already linked
to a URN once using the CITE attribute on a BLOCKQUOTE...)
>>>yet there is something very different about that one -- it's the title
>>>of another work. I'd like to be able to style all such titles
>>>consistently, so they have to be marked up in some way.
>>In that case, would you want to differentiate between ordinary titles
>>and real citations? Or is that something that the class attribute could
>>handle, if needed?
> I don't know. What do people think?
>>> Movie titles are similar. I'd like my UA to give me a tooltip
>>> containing information from IMDB for every movie title. With user
>> Then would you want different markup for book titles, movie titles,
>> play titles, song titles, etc? Or would you just expect the script
>> to search IMDB for anything marked up with <cite>?
> Again, I don't really know. I could see a use case for a "type"
> attribute (as was suggested earlier in this thread), but that seems
> like a slippery slope. Suggestions?
If we go with something like a TYPE attribute, I hope we can give it a
better name. However, hiding semantics inside the value of an attribute
is a poor markup design in humble opinion. (Although it also has some
Anne van Kesteren
More information about the whatwg