Might be worth looking at the work on the Microformats site for more detailed citation markup
<http://microformats.org/wiki/cite> <http://microformats.org/wiki/citation-examples> <http://microformats.org/wiki/citation-examples#List_of_all_properties> <http://microformats.org/wiki/citation-examples-markup#Breakdown_of_Citation _Elements> HTH Russ on 17/1/07 11:47 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at wrote: > <cite> is a single element. > > A full bibliographic reference will typically contain a selection from: > Article name > Journal name > Authors name(s) > Editors name(s) > Date of publication > > and probably a few other things. As you can see, each item needs to be > kept distinct from each other, so a single container is not enough. A > suitable micro-format would be great, but the point is that regardless > of what non-sighted users require, a visual user requires a visual > distinction. Clearly each item is of fairly equal importance, so neither > <em> or <strong> is appropriate, semantically speaking. > > Mike ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************
