Parsoid: References should be wrapped in a <sup>, not a <span>
Open, LowPublic

Description

Canonical HTML (from PHP parser):

<sup id="cite_ref-Forty_47-0" class="reference">
  <a href="#cite_note-Forty-47"><span>[</span>47<span>]</span></a>
</sup>

Output from Parsoid:

<span id="cite_ref-Forty-46-0" class="reference" about="#mwt408" typeof="mw:Object/Ext/Cite" data-parsoid="…">
  <a href="#cite_note-Forty-46">[47]</a>
</span>

I have no idea if the inner spans have any value, but the outer span should be a sup element instead.

(Also, the names of the cites are indexed from 0 in names but 1 in label - 46 vs. 47, whereas in PHP parser they're indexed from 1 in both; not sure if this is a problem.)

Details

Security
None
Reference
bz43094
bzimport set Reference to bz43094.

About sup and sub in the HTML5 spec:

"These elements must be used only to mark up typographical conventions with specific meanings, not for typographical presentation for presentation's sake. For example, it would be inappropriate for the sub and sup elements to be used in the name of the LaTeX document preparation system. In general, authors should use these elements only if the absence of those elements would change the meaning of the content."

This does not seem to be the case here, and styling is more flexible with spans. Since we will require some CSS adjustments anyway we might as well clean this one up too.

Closing as WONTFIX for that reason.

kaldari reopened this task as "Open".Mar 26 2015, 9:58 PM
kaldari added a subscriber: kaldari.

I have to disagree with @GWicke's comment above. Using <sup> for reference numbers is semantically correct. Reference numbers are considered a standard type of superscript notation (like asterisks and daggers). Even if we didn't present them as such, they should still be defined as superscript content. In fact, I can't really think of any use of <sup> that is more semantically correct than using it for footnote numbers (which is probably why this use is given as an example of proper use of the <sup> tag at places like w3schools.com).[1]

  1. http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_sup.asp
matmarex edited the task description. (Show Details)Jul 11 2015, 2:23 PM
matmarex set Security to None.

Even if we didn't present them as such, they should still be defined as superscript content.

This seems to agree with the notion that it would *not* change the meaning of the content if they were not rendered as superscript.

Either way, I think this is a border line case with both options being somewhat sub-(or sup?)optimal. I wished something like <cite> had semantics closer to what we are looking for.

Restricted Application added a subscriber: Aklapper. · View Herald TranscriptJul 22 2015, 7:59 PM
cscott added a subscriber: cscott.Jul 22 2015, 8:11 PM

I think <sup> is reasonable; you can always use CSS to remove the superscript-ness, but using <sup> means that naïve content consumers (ie, with the default HTML stylesheet) will display things in a reasonable manner.

@Esanders, @santhosh, @Catrope, @Mattflaschen any concerns / thoughts about making this change from your perspectives? Whenever we do this, it will be a HTML version bump on the Parsoid end.

Superscript for references appears to be a style guide recommendation that varies from place to place, rather than an agreed notation, like CO<sub>2</sub>, or E=mc<sup>2</sup> - there doesn't even seem to be agreement on square vs round brackets.

@Esanders, @santhosh, @Catrope, @Mattflaschen any concerns / thoughts about making this change from your perspectives? Whenever we do this, it will be a HTML version bump on the Parsoid end.

If VE will support both old and new format, it will be okay. I don't think we do anything with Parsoid versions yet.

Arlolra removed GWicke as the assignee of this task.Feb 5 2016, 5:28 AM

Add Comment