SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    199
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    <cite> ok for books titles?

    The title says it all

  2. #2
    Sploghm bronze trophy Victorinox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    749
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    This article is worth perusing: The rise and fall of <cite>

  3. #3
    Mouse catcher silver trophy
    Stevie D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Yorkshire, UK
    Posts
    5,830
    Mentioned
    111 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    That's a perfectly valid usage of <cite>. It doesn't really have any value beyond being a styling hook, but it is at least a semantically defined styling hook, which is better than a meaningless <i>, but if you want referenced book titles to be set in italics (or any other style you choose) then <cite> is the right way to go about it.

  4. #4
    SQL Consultant gold trophysilver trophybronze trophy
    r937's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    39,017
    Mentioned
    53 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Victorinox View Post
    This article is worth perusing: The rise and fall of <cite>
    that article seems to contradict what deathshadow60 said here

    i've always used CITE for titles of works and it seems html5 is clarifying the previous confusion to conform to this idea

    Quote Originally Posted by the rise and fall of CITE
    “A piece of work”, heh, that’s good
    r937.com | rudy.ca | Buy my SitePoint book: Simply SQL
    "giving out my real stuffs"

  5. #5
    Robert Wellock silver trophybronze trophy xhtmlcoder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    A Maze of Twisty Little Passages
    Posts
    6,316
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    With regards to a ship if you were referencing her, and her name and actions; Regalskeppet Vasa you would use the <cite> element.

    The CITE marks up citation; a reference to a source you are quoting; either directly via BLOCKQUOTE or Q, or indirectly via paraphrasing.

  6. #6
    Sploghm bronze trophy Victorinox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    749
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    From the linked article, an example that observes the HTML5 spec:

    Code HTML:
    <p><cite>Aladdin</cite> is a great movie, even after 73 viewings. Aren’t kids great?</p>

    So, as the spec states cite may be applied to "a work that is mentioned in passing", we're seemingly invited to apply it thus:

    Code HTML:
    The first book of <cite>The Lord of the Rings</cite> trilogy, by J.R.R. Tolkein, was <cite>The Fellowship of the Ring</cite>, followed by <cite>The Two Towers</cite> and, finally, The <cite>Return of the King</cite>.

    And if we feel the author's name is unfairly left out of the game we have the option of marking it up with sort-of-HTML5-ish Microformats.

    An article on cite at the WHATWG Wiki (created by Tantek Çelik) in support of retaining it's use for speakers or individuals.

    Jeremy Keith's 24 Ways article Incite A Riot also argues against the new restriction.

    Benevolent Dicteditor of HTML5 Ian Hickson explains his decision.

    As I've no plans to use HTML5 at present, I'll continue using cite for sources of quoted content, not for any old title of a work that appears in the markup.

  7. #7
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Uhm... no... *** no... Whiskey tango foxtrot no?

    Are you CITING the book as in you have a quote on the page, or are you just saying it's name... if you're just saying the books name, it should be an <i> tag! If you're quoting, paraphrasing, or otherwise listing it as a source of information, THEN it's CITE.

    Unless of course you subscribe to that HTML 5 BS, in which case you can throw the very notion of semantics out the window and apply all sorts of nonsensical meanings all over the place...

    Since basically HTML 5 says "people are too stupid, so to hell with it just use things any old way who cares about meaning".


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •