[MacEachaidh]

James, Luke, you've both misread what I said.

The two examples you've given, James, are both direct speech. The convention in English - every variant of English, as far as I'm aware - is to put the punctuation mark ending the quoted direct speech within the inverted commas. Commas, full stops, question and exclamation marks - all the same.

I was making the distinction about things enclosed in inverted commas that aren't direct speech. How that's handled varies between North American English and pretty much every other version. For instance, I might write
What does someone mean when they say it's "just not right"?
whereas in US English (and Canadian too, I believe, though I'm happy to be corrected) the convention would be to write
What does someone mean when they say it's "just not right?"

The North American usage looks weird to me, because my understanding is that the question mark isn't actually part of the phrase that's being quoted, so shouldn't be included within the quotation marks. (The Chicago Manual of Style says that's how it should be, though.) But also because it makes it look like the quoted phrase is a question, when it's not; it's a statement, and the whole sentence is the question.

There's a similar confusion over italicising and bolding. The Oxford and Cambridge style guides say the punctuation mark shouldn't have the attribute applied to it, unless it's an intrinsic part of the phrase that's bolded or italicised; the Chicago manual (up until the latest edition) said that the following punctuation should also have the attribute applied. (That's what MS Word does by default, for instance. I find it very annoying.)

The Chicago Manual caused a bit of a stir with its most recent edition by reversing this position and siding with the Brit publications. Whether publications et al will change their habits to match remains to be seen.