So, I understand our styling is incorrect. Currently,
t cite
is used for quotations, but that's not what the tag was designed for (it's supposed to be for the name of the work). It should be
t blockquote
.
Worthy fixing? Obviously it's not a biggie, but it might bork up people's custom style sheets.
Yeah, it should be <blockquote>. I don't know how extensively the majority of the userbase has customized their style sheets. It should be reasonably simple for them to correct, if it causes them problems, right?
I couldn't think why it would be anything but.
Yeah, even for those who have done a lot, it would just be a matter of search/replace for that selector.
edit: better still, for anyone who has restyled the
t cite
tag in custom css, instead of replacing it with
blockquote
replace it with
cite, blockquote
That will catch both, in case of naughty people who don't use the quick-edits. Like I didn't on my first attempt there, and you see what trouble it brought me!
Would it be bad form to search the table containing personal CSSes to see if it's even an issue?
Will making this change make the ">" and "]" quick edits interchangeable?
t really too ignorant to be in this conversation, but curious
Would it be bad form to search the table containing personal CSSes to see if it's even an issue?
I can't see any issue with a search to see how many people are touching it; just a few people would have a different impact than lots. (I'd also be really curious to know something about how many people are customizing at all, and how much - in a totally anonymous way, of course)
We don't have any tags that generate
t blockquote
. ']' generates
t dfn
.
I use cite in my CSS, so I can change the color of the text. It makes it easy to pick out what's being cited as separate from the rest of the text.