Subject: Re: Questions about the NetBSD 2.0.2 RA
To: Hiroki Sato <hrs@NetBSD.org>
From: Mike M. Volokhov <email@example.com>
Date: 04/20/2005 10:01:11
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 00:01:13 +0900 (JST)
Hiroki Sato <hrs@NetBSD.org> wrote:
> Jan Schaumann <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote
> in <20050419141700.GE13189@netmeister.org>:
> js> > Why not use <blockquote/> tags instead?
> js> Mainly because nobody noticed that this might be a good tag. ;-)
> Hmm, I think the both of <note> and <blockquote> are wrong.
> If we think an URL is part of a paragraph in NetBSD-2.0.2.xml
> <para> should be correct, and if we think it needs to be rendered
> specially <literallayout> should be used. <note> is for a note
> and <blockquote> is a quotation from somewhere.
Well, while primary definition of "quote" is a "citation", the another
one might be "emphasize text with quotation marks", isn't it?
From <quote> description :
``Using an element for quotations is frequently more convenient than
entering the character entities for the quotation marks by hand, and
makes it possible for a presentation system to alter the format of the
Thus, both <quote> and <blockquote> seems allowed to use as text
Next, please compare the following two exaples:
<para>More information is available at:</para>
<para role="indented"><ulink url="URL"/></para>
<para>More information is available at:
As you can see, with <blockquote> a structure of the source document is
bit more logical.
I just wish to show you my thoughts about why I'm use <blockquote>.
But in any case, <note> is not appropriate tag here and you patch looks
very well. So if you still prefer <para role="indented"> (or <para
role="emphasized"> ;-) and there are no more comments, please commit it
thus I may finish my translation.