In agreement with Jeremy, I too have found the blockquote/q cite attribute to be nearly as ignored as the longdesc attribute, despite having conducted talks and written tutorials about how to use the cite="" attribute (makes me think that the non-visible-effect-URL attributes on elements should be considered an anti-pattern, evidenced by the fact that they (cite, longdesc, profile etc.) have all failed to get any meaningful uptake among web developers).
On slightly a more positive note: On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 12:35, Karl Dubost <ka...@opera.com> wrote: > > Le 14 juil. 2011 à 14:59, Kevin Marks a écrit : >> If I was writing a detector for this pattern, <a> followed by a colon >> and <blockquote> would do it pretty reliably... > > yup unfortunately there are also many cases where you have more names in an > introducing paragraph. It is happening when I'm writing, and the issue is > then to tie the right person with the right blockquote/q > > I like the pattern id/for pattern of forms. We could imagine > > <p> > <span for="quoteA" class="author">Sir John Typo</span> > has written plenty of a wonderful thing > in <cite for="quoteA">Amazing title</cite> very similar to those in > <span for="quoteB" class="author">Susan Spellchecker</span>'s writings > > <blockquote id="quoteA"> > […] > </blockquote> > > compare to <cite for="quoteB">Amazing title</cite> > > <blockquote id="quoteB"> > </blockquote> I really like this pattern. <label for="input-id"> is a known working and in use pattern. Thus I feel much more confident advocating use of the parallel: <cite for="quote-id"> With one concern - multiple blockquotes. Thus the for attribute should be a space separated set of IDREFs. E.g. this pattern (often seen on blog posts analyzing articles and other blog posts) <cite for="quote1 quote2">Some quoted title of a work</cite> <blockquote id="quote1"> one quotation </blockquote> <p> .. intervening commentary .. </p> <blockquote id="quote2"> another quotation </blockquote> <p> .. more commentary ..</p> Though that example is vulnerable to bad copy/paste errors. It requires two markup updates (done consistently) for each copy/paste: a new id on each new blockquote, and having to update the original cite element for each additional blockquote. That example redone with today's cite attribute would be: <cite id="cite1">Some quoted title of a work</cite> <blockquote cite="#cite1"> one quotation </blockquote> <p> .. intervening commentary .. </p> <blockquote cite="#cite1"> another quotation </blockquote> <p> .. more commentary ..</p> which is then much more copy/paste proof if/when the author adds more blockquotes from the same source that they're commenting on - fewer bits of markup (none) to update. So I don't know. Perhaps <cite for> handles the 80/20 one cite / one quote case better and that's good enough to add it, and then perhaps we keep the old cite="" attribute for the one cite / multiple quote case? Tantek -- http://tantek.com/ - I made an HTML5 tutorial! http://tantek.com/html5
