citeVia
Since I first wrote about hVia on Friday, there’s been some good discussion going on. We’re calling the idea ‘citeVia’ now, but that’s really just a working name and could easily be changed.
Our initial proposal was basically to do this for via links:
Via <cite class="via"><a href="http://www.example.com">Mr. Example</a></cite>
After comments from Tantek, we realized that the whole issue of citation in HTML is an undefinted area. There doesn’t seem to be any specified connection between <cite>, <blockquote> and <q>.
Tantek brings up the cite-a vs. a-cite issue. Mainly, he askes what else a cite tag wrapped around an a tag could mean beside a via-link. While it would be nice to have come up with a new HTML compound, I think things are trickier than that.
I think Eran does a nice job of summarizing the issues in this comment.
I think Eran and I finally understand Tantek’s oringinal point. However, it still seems necessary to use class=”via” to disambiguate the via-links. For us, a via-link is different that a regular citation. Often you’ll want to quote from a particular blog, but point out that you found out about that content somewhere else. The via-link is to the intermediary, not the source.
I’m not sure where to go from here. Tantek, I’m not sure if we’re not understanding each other or Eran and I just aren’t getting it. Either way, we need more input from anyone’s who’s interested.
In conclusion, a couple notes:
- Bud Gibson has used citeVia here
- We’ve pretty much dropped the idea of citations that don’t have a link. Those probably aren’t very interesting.
