[rfc-i] On blockquotes and notes for v3

Paul Kyzivat pkyzivat at alum.mit.edu
Mon Feb 24 11:47:57 PST 2014


On 2/24/14 1:01 PM, Nico Williams wrote:
> On Monday, February 24, 2014, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
> <mailto:paul.hoffman at vpnc.org>> wrote:
>
>     On Feb 24, 2014, at 8:40 AM, Nico Williams <nico at cryptonector.com
>     <javascript:;>> wrote:
>
>      > I do want an explicit quote/cite mechanism, yes.
>      >
>      > I'd also like a way to get specific as to what's being cited
>     (RFC1234 section 2.3, second paragraph; URL fragment) but that's
>     less important.
>      >
>      > The specifics of what the schema then looks like are less
>     important to me.  But yes, what you describe works for me, except
>     I'd rather nest t/blockquote elements than indicate indentation as
>     an attribute, and I'd really rather not express outdentation as an
>     attribute.
>
>     When you say "I'd rather nest t/blockquote elements than indicate
>     indentation as an attribute", do you mean that you want <blockquote>
>     to be automatically indented and someone cannot use an attribute on
>     <t> to indicate indentation? If so, wouldn't that cause
>
>
> Yes.
>
>     people who want to indent a paragraph like a note to mis-use
>     <blockquote>? Or am I misunderstanding what you are saying about
>     what you want from <t>?
>
>
> No, I want nesting of t and blockquote (since one might quoted someone's
> quoting of someone else) to express indentation.  Indentation (and by
> how much!) is an output format rendering detail!  Our inputs need to
> express semantics (the following is a quote, or the following needs to
> be inset/indented/whatever to distinguish it from surrounding text, ...).

This doesn't work for me.

<t> describes a *paragraph*. A blockquote is often a standalone 
paragraph. It would be annoying to have to write 
<t><blockquote>...</blockquote></t>.

That is even more true for <t> in <t>.

	Thanks,
	Paul

> I mean to say that indentation (or not) is an aspect of output
> formatting that must not be specified in the xml input -- what matters
> is semantics, that if one thing is "nested" in another,  that's what
> needs to be expressed.  An output format might use a different method of
> rendering nesting than indentation -- I probably wouldn't like such a
> format, but the whole point of xml2rfc is to express content semantics
> and not specific rendering details... with exceptions only because the
> final rendering sometimes needs adjustments, so we should keep vspace,
> and we'll probably need an indentation adjustment attribute for similar
> reasons, but people should mostly write what they mean, not how to
> display it.
>
> Nico
> --
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
>



More information about the rfc-interest mailing list