I'm saying it's good on a semantic level. The fact that this has to put it on a political agenda is unfortunate, but does put me behind that agenda. Do note which one is the cause and which is the effect.

So I'm curious - how were you planning to use Q over BLOCKQUOTE? I appreciate that getting more semantics is good but it isn't worth it if it isn't going to be usable for most people out there. That is, the PM-using audience anyway. We use *more* oddball and standards-appreciating clients but I would guess most of the people here on Windows are also here on IE (citing my own server logs which gets a lot of referrals from pm http://lik.grenekatz.org/analog/os.png).

Do not confuse BLOCKQUOTE with Q. They serve very different purposes. Q is an inline element for inline quotations. BLOCKQUOTE is a block-level element (you can't use it inside paragraph tags f.ex) and must only contain block-level elements itself (so you must write <blockquote><p>text here</p></blockquote> in order for the markup to validate — leaving out the paragraph tags leads to invalid markup).

It would be silly to argue which one should be used: there is no overlap in functionality.

Makeshifts last the longest.