Welcome to WebHeadStart.org

Web Technologies

Sponsored By

WebHeadStart.org is currently in beta.
Please pardon our appearance as we work to provide you with the most comprehensive reference on today's web technologies.

Interested in advertising on WebHeadStart? Become an advertising partner today!

[WWW-HTML Mailing List Archive Home] [Messages By Thread] [Messages By Date]

Re: longcode and longquote instead of blockcode and blockquote

From: Orion Adrian <orion.adrian@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 18:30:43 -0400
Message-ID: <abd6c8010507071530fc5d547@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-html@w3.org

On 7/7/05, David Dorward <david@dorward.me.uk> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 06:22:12PM -0400, Orion Adrian wrote:
> 
> > > I use block quotes because they contain paragraphs, or blocks of code
> > > - i.e. becuase I'm quoting blocks - not due to their length.
> 
> > If that's the case then wouldn't <codeblock>
> 
> If I'm quoting code? No. Although it might be useful to have a block
> element for holding code. Currently I use a <pre> with a <code> inside
> it. Although I would probably still use an inline code element inside
> that as sometimes I have several nested <code> (e.g. with classes
> "xml", "tag", "attribute", "value", etc) since that provides an
> elegent way to attach syntax highlighting in a stylesheet).
> 
> > or <quoteblock> be more accurate?
> 
> A block that is quoted, or a quoted block. Makes little different
> really. I'd stick to blockquote to avoid needless (and confusing)
> differences with HTML 4 element names.

Since that would be such a minor point I would have to agree here. If
we decide to stick with this, consistency much rule the day.

-- 

Orion Adrian
Received on Thursday, 7 July 2005 22:30:45 GMT
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS! Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | WebHeadStart.org © 2005 All Rights Reserved.