Comments on: Friday Fun: The sarcasm tag

By: Ezekiel Bruni

Ezekiel Bruni — Fri, 25 May 2007 12:03:20 +0000

Meh, I could see this as being fairly useful, actually…

By: marian

marian — Fri, 25 May 2007 12:11:37 +0000

Useful, yeah, but… It would sort of take away part of the “victoire!” feeling.

Still useful. Fair enough.

By: trovster

trovster — Fri, 25 May 2007 12:30:06 +0000

I proposed the sarcasm tag back in day. Maybe someone in the HTML5 group can sneakily add it. That’d be fun. What about Sarcasm over IP…

By: Davide

Davide — Fri, 25 May 2007 12:32:05 +0000

The problem with sarcasm mad explicit is that, if you don’t get the double meaning, you become a target. Make sarcasm explicit and you destroy it :-)

By: Chris James

Chris James — Fri, 25 May 2007 13:01:29 +0000

I honestly think this could be a good idea!

If you think about it, it adds semantic meaning to text, just like strong and em do.

By: Phil

Phil — Fri, 25 May 2007 13:06:39 +0000

Maybe if we don’t sneak it into HTML 5 it could be born as a microformat?

That will be a good idea

This is much better

By: Andrew Faulkner

Andrew Faulkner — Fri, 25 May 2007 13:24:50 +0000

Wow - you seem to be on board. OK, before I put it to the W3C HTML5 group, what attributes may the tag need? ; )

By: Brandon

Brandon — Fri, 25 May 2007 15:06:32 +0000

Erm. 95% of forums still have standard HTML formatting turned off, so it would still have a limited application.

I have seen a lot of people using tags already. With about the same effect, since there really wouldn’t be a way to consistently visually represent sarcasm.

Oh wait, the strikethrough! Oh. They’re already using that?

By: Chisa

Chisa — Fri, 25 May 2007 15:46:52 +0000

You forgot the sarcasm tags around ‘great font’ =P

By: trovster

trovster — Thu, 31 May 2007 17:32:19 +0000

@ Phil: It wouldn’t be a microformat. And the reason they’ve come up with the whole POSH stuff is to stop people calling Plain Old Semantic HTML a ‘microformat’. It’s just a semantic class/rule which you use. Microformats are more of a semantic HTML consensus to port existing standards in to HTML (such as hAtom/Atom and hCard/vCard) among other things. Also, I would not use the rel attribute for this solution, a class is more correct. Rel is for link/anchors to tell the user-agent what type of content is going to be found relative to this page.

By: YPM

YPM — Tue, 05 Jun 2007 15:43:20 +0000

A while ago a friend told me that there was a new sign for irony, just like the "!" only then the vertical stripe replaced with a thunderbolt. I think they should fix something like that up for sarcasm too.

By: Daniela

Daniela — Mon, 11 Jun 2007 14:32:08 +0000

Too bad I couldn’t tell if this article was sarcastic or not. I couldn’t find the <sarcasm> tag in the View Page Source. :)

By: Paul Enderson

Paul Enderson — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 17:23:12 +0000

Why stop with just the sarcasm tag? You should make it a whole sub-language, called something like ’subtlety’ - although this will probably be shortened to SJAX or something equally ridiculous.Oh, and you really need to include irony, satire, ridicule and condesention at the very least.

By: Andrew Faulkner

Andrew Faulkner — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 17:43:01 +0000

Great suggestions, Paul.

I'll get a spec written up and pass it onto a W3C member.

By: Krista

Krista — Sun, 19 Aug 2007 02:47:58 +0000

hi nice post, i enjoyed it