[dokuwiki] Re: pending patches?
- From: Sander Tekelenburg <tekelenb@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: dokuwiki@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 04:01:35 +0100
At 22:03 +0100 UTC, on 2007-02-09, Anika Henke wrote:
> Sander Tekelenburg wrote:
[...]
>> Well, if the text in question is in fact a quote (and why else would you use
>> quote characters), the proper mark-up would be to use <q> or <blockquote>.
>>If
>> you're saying those elements aren't there, then I'd say *that* is the
>>problem.
>
> I disagree. Normally, I am all for semantics, but in this case the
> starting point is simply wrong: Quotation marks are *not only* used for
> quotes!
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotation_mark lists a few such cases
Whoops. You're right of course. My "why else would you use quote characters"
was sloppy.
(Although in my defense, I got the impression from the OP that he was in fact
talking about quoted text, not about quote marks for the other sorts of uses
you mention.)
[...]
> In all those cases a surrounding <q></q> would be very far from being
> semantically correct.
Agreed.
> (Let alone the fact that the opinions of the <q>
> tag are quite controversial, see http://alistapart.com/comments/qtag/
Looks like a bunch of only vaguely related remarks there. Is there anything
in particular you are referring to?
What stands out to me is that they argue against <q> because IE doesn't
support it, and because XHTML 2.0 aims to get rid of<q> -- ignoring that IE
doesn't support XHTML. At the very least those arguments exclude each other,
but no one there seems to acknowledge that.
> or
> http://diveintomark.org/archives/2002/08/14/the_q_tag_revisited.)
IMO that one is a rubbish argument. It's a bit like aguing against democracy
just because some democratically elected politicians suck.
(I initially wrote a lot more (about IE, Jaws, standards), but deleted that
because that's not really about Dokuwik and so probably considered a bit too
off topic here.)
>> I do recognise that Dokuwiki's inline editor doesn't offer buttons to
>> generate such mark-up, so you'd have to allow raw HTML to be entered. (Or
>> perhaps it can be done with markdown, which I believe Dokuwiki supports.)
>
> Maybe a markup for inline quotes are missing? Would it be used??
That probably depends on the users. I'm sure that in some environments they
wouldn't use it, and in others they would.
Possibly if the default CSS would suggest proper, language dependant, quote
characters, that would encourage people to use it? It would return an
immediate visual result that people generally don't know how to achieve
(entering 'special characters').
[...]
> Unless you can "guess" (here again! ;-) ) the kind of quotation mark
> usage in a text, it makes no sense to *always* use <q> ...
Agreed. Still, I suspect that you do agree that wherever <q> or <blockquote>
*are* appropriate, it's better to use them then to simply enter quote
characters, right?
--
Sander Tekelenburg, <http://www.euronet.nl/~tekelenb/>
--
DokuWiki mailing list - more info at
http://wiki.splitbrain.org/wiki:mailinglist
Other related posts:
