Any thoughts on how an attribution line for a blockquote should be marked
up?

--
Lars Eighner usenet@larseighner.com http://www.larseighner.com/
"We have no opinion on your Arab - Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with
Kuwait." -- Bush's Ambassador April Glaspie, giving Saddam Hussein
the greenlight to invade Kuwait.

On Sat, 18 Feb 2006, Lars Eighner wrote:
[color=blue]
> Any thoughts on how an attribution line for a blockquote should be
> marked up?[/color]

That's a hard one, which I've pondered over before and not been happy
with either result. (Don't forget that blockquote has a cite="%URI"
attribute, but it doesn't seem to be what you're interested in here).

(I'm ignoring any additional wrappers needed in Strict, so as
to keep the discussion simple).

One option seems to be:

<blockquote>The quoted text
<cite>A.N.Other</cite>
</blockquote>

But the citation isn't really part of the quoted text, and it can
hardly be argued that putting it into an inner <cite> element should
somehow remove it from the quoted text; so that's wrong, really (even
though I suspect that you'll find I've done it in places).

Unless and until an enhanced blockquote is defined, with some
dedicated internal markup (blockcite element?) defined to be its
citation, I don't see what we can do, really.

Another option, then, seems to be to take the cite outside of the
blockquote

<blockquote>The quoted text</blockquote>
<cite>A.N.Other</cite>

But then there's no construct which binds the two together. Something
like:

<div class="bq">
<blockquote>The quoted text</blockquote>
<cite>A.N.Other</cite>
</div>

seems awfully artificial.

Google suggests reading for example this discussion:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/...4Jul/0046.html

What are your thoughts on the matter?

Sat, 18 Feb 2006 07:28:13 -0600 from Lars Eighner
<usenet@larseighner.com>:[color=blue]
> Any thoughts on how an attribution line for a blockquote should be marked
> up?[/color]

I do it as <p class="XXX">...</p></blockquote> (but with a more
meaningful name than "XXX" of course).

XXX is {text-align:right}; I can't remember if there are any other
properties but that's the main one.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/
HTML 4.01 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/
validator: http://validator.w3.org/
CSS 2.1 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/
validator: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
Why We Won't Help You:
http://diveintomark.org/archives/200..._wont_help_you

Lars Eighner wrote:
[color=blue]
> Any thoughts on how an attribution line for a blockquote should be marked
> up?[/color]

I would make a broader question: how should we present block quotations
in HTML documents? There's more than just the attribution, as I've tried
to explain in http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/html/bq.html

The <blockquote> element has been abused (for mere indentation) so
widely that browsers cannot handle it in a semantically meaningful way.
For example, if speech browsers started to say "start of quotation" and
"end of quotation", quite a many pages would sound _really_ odd,
especially those that use nested blockquote elements to achieve larger
indentation.

We should make sure that the content, when taken as text, expresses
clearly enough where a quotation starts and ends. Similar considerations
apply then to the attribution. The markup isn't really the issue, since
there is no adequate markup. We need to write as we would in plain text,
regarding the eventual indentation and other visual effects just as
additional extras.

In general, I'd suggest

<blockquote cite="URL">
The actual quotation.
</blockquote>
<div class="credit" align="right"><small>Source:
<cite><a href="URL">Title</a></cite>.</small></div>

preceded by an introductory statement that makes it clear that a
quotation follows.

In our last episode,
<Pine.LNX.4.62.0602181346310.23870@ppepc70.ph.gla. ac.uk>,
the lovely and talented Alan J. Flavell
broadcast on comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html:
[color=blue]
> On Sat, 18 Feb 2006, Lars Eighner wrote:[/color]
[color=blue][color=green]
>> Any thoughts on how an attribution line for a blockquote should be
>> marked up?[/color][/color]
[color=blue]
> That's a hard one, which I've pondered over before and not been happy
> with either result. (Don't forget that blockquote has a cite="%URI"
> attribute, but it doesn't seem to be what you're interested in here).[/color]

No, but of course BLOCKQUOTE also has title, which is a reasonable
place to put an attribution, but doesn't do the document any good.

[color=blue]
> (I'm ignoring any additional wrappers needed in Strict, so as
> to keep the discussion simple).[/color]
[color=blue]
> One option seems to be:[/color]
[color=blue]
><blockquote>The quoted text
><cite>A.N.Other</cite>
></blockquote>[/color]

snip Problems.

[color=blue]
><blockquote>The quoted text</blockquote>
><cite>A.N.Other</cite>[/color]
[color=blue]
> But then there's no construct which binds the two together. Something
> like:[/color]
[color=blue]
><div class="bq">
><blockquote>The quoted text</blockquote>
><cite>A.N.Other</cite>
></div>[/color]
[color=blue]
> seems awfully artificial.[/color]

%flow is a tool of the devil, it's darksided!!!!
[color=blue]
> Google suggests reading for example this discussion:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/...4Jul/0046.html[/color]
[color=blue]
> What are your thoughts on the matter?[/color]

It's always "what should the spec be" vs. "I want to markup a document
today."

I'm thinking:

<blockquote>
<div class="body">

</div>
<div class="source">

</div>
</blockquote>

And I think the spec should go in this direction. I am sympathetic
to the argument that the attribution isn't part of the quote, but it seems
to me the source can be viewed as part of the blockquote. It it's there
it has to be inextricably bound to body - often, you know, it isn't even a
complete sentence.

I'd see the body part tags as being implied, and if necessary, closed by
opening the source part.

I'm out of sympathy with the view that what happens to blockquote should in
any way influenced by how it has been abused.

--
Lars Eighner usenet@larseighner.com http://www.larseighner.com/
"I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O Lord,
make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it." --Voltaire

Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote in
news:MPG.1e610836ab4a283398a097@news.individual.ne t:
[color=blue]
> Sat, 18 Feb 2006 07:28:13 -0600 from Lars Eighner
> <usenet@larseighner.com>:[color=green]
>> Any thoughts on how an attribution line for a blockquote should be
>> marked up?[/color]
>
> I do it as <p class="XXX">...</p></blockquote> (but with a more
> meaningful name than "XXX" of course).
>
> XXX is {text-align:right}; I can't remember if there are any other
> properties but that's the main one.
>[/color]

I've used this as well. Until there is an specifically designed for
this, I see this as the best option available. It may not actually be
a paragraph, but I think is close enough for arguments sake, the class
providing the semantics. In doing this, I usually use the class name
"attribution."

--
Stan McCann, "Uncle Pirate" http://stanmccann.us/
Webmaster, NMSU at Alamogordo http://alamo.nmsu.edu/
Now blocking Google Grouper posts and replies.
http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

On Sat, 18 Feb 2006, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
[color=blue]
> The <blockquote> element has been abused (for mere indentation) so
> widely that browsers cannot handle it in a semantically meaningful
> way.[/color]

I don't think it's fair to discredit HTML constructs merely on the
basis that they have been widely abused.
[color=blue]
> For example, if speech browsers started to say "start of quotation"
> and "end of quotation", quite a many pages would sound _really_ odd,
> especially those that use nested blockquote elements to achieve
> larger indentation.[/color]

"Sound really odd"? Of course they *should*! Tag abuse should reap
its own rewards!!! Then we're well on the way to getting the problem
resolved (consider the way that the alt text, widely abused as popups,
has been slowly overtaken by the use of the title attribute, but only
because some of the popular browsers have moved to support it).
[color=blue]
> In general, I'd suggest
>
> <blockquote cite="URL">
> The actual quotation.
> </blockquote>
> <div class="credit" align="right"><small>Source:
> <cite><a href="URL">Title</a></cite>.</small></div>[/color]

But you have nothing to bind the quote to its attribution. They are
merely adjacent - nothing more. Juxtaposition is no good recipe for a
structured markup, IMHO. How do we reach agreement on whether the
citation should come before or after the quotation to which it
refers?

regards

Sat, 18 Feb 2006 18:45:42 +0200 from Jukka K. Korpela
<jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>:[color=blue]
> The <blockquote> element has been abused (for mere indentation) so
> widely that browsers cannot handle it in a semantically meaningful way.[/color]

That sounds like you want blockquote never to be properly used since
it has been misused. I'm sure you don't actually mean that.

If we stopped using HTML elements that have been widely misused, we'd
have to give up <hN> (often misused just to "force" text size or
style) and <table> (often misused for layout) and <dl> (often misused
for indents) among others.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/
HTML 4.01 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/
validator: http://validator.w3.org/
CSS 2.1 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/
validator: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
Why We Won't Help You:
http://diveintomark.org/archives/200..._wont_help_you

On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 17:55:01 -0500, Stan Brown
<the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:
[color=blue]
>If we stopped using HTML elements that have been widely misused, we'd
>have to give up <hN>[/color]

Would we have _any_ HTML left ?

Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:
[color=blue]
> Sat, 18 Feb 2006 18:45:42 +0200 from Jukka K. Korpela
> <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi>:[color=green]
>> The <blockquote> element has been abused (for mere indentation) so
>> widely that browsers cannot handle it in a semantically meaningful
>> way.[/color][/color]

What I wrote was about browsers: they have been effectively forced into
implementing <blockquote> markup as an indentation instruction, if they
render a page visually, and ignore it otherwise. You can see this if
you e.g. use a user style sheet that renders <blockquote> essentially
differently (but in a manner that is quite consistent with the idea of
"block quotation") and browse around a little.

Similar considerations apply to other user agents. If a search engine
implement a feature "search for ... in quoted text", then it would be
_logical_ to treat <blockquote> (and <q>) contents always as quotes.
In practice however this would give grossly wrong results, treating
bulks of text as quoted when it is in fact just indented. (Moreover, it
would catch just a small fraction of texts that are actually
quotations.)
[color=blue]
> That sounds like you want blockquote never to be properly used
> since it has been misused. I'm sure you don't actually mean that.[/color]

The conclusion to be drawn is that we cannot _rely_ on having our
quotations understood as quotations just because we use <blockquote>.
Moreover, after making sure that other methods (mainly the use of
words) indicates a piece of text as quoted, it does not really matter
much whether you use <blockquote> or not. Using it is the logical thing
and should do no harm, though.
[color=blue]
> If we stopped using HTML elements that have been widely misused,
> we'd have to give up <hN> (often misused just to "force" text size
> or style) and <table> (often misused for layout) and <dl> (often
> misused for indents) among others.[/color]

Well, the arguments against <blockquote> work against <dl> as well.
We might decide to use these elements according to their defined
semantics, but let us not deceive ourselves: we do not really expect
them to be processed according to such semantics, and the only thing we
actually get is the particular layout. We would do what almost everyone
else does, just (perhaps) under semantic constraints as a matter of
principle.

Regarding heading markup, I don't think the abuse is that common, and
processing it by its semantics is not impractical at all - at least if
we ignore <h5> and <h6>, which are probably more often used for just
making text small than for 5th and 6th level headings, which are rarely
needed anyway.

Tables are much more often misused for layout than for tabular data
(though there are many bordeline cases), but this does not make tables
useless. In fact, tables are the best (and often the only feasible) way
of achieving a tabulated display of a table - which is a presentational
issue, yet something that we surely want.

--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html