In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul Wilkins
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
you might write the date as 4/7/76 and force the reader to find and
use the abbreviation, but as someone who cares enough to create a
datetime design pattern, it should be obvious that writing the date as
July 4, 1776 solves the problem.
That's not always going to be feasible; consider tabular data, or
verbatim quotations for instance.
Another trouble is that with the arbitrary datetime pattern in use, how
can the machine benefit from that information. It's not immediately
clear.
It's not just the machines that might benefit. A semantically marked-up
date can be presented according to the users preferences. Given
2007-03-04, you might prefer to see March 4th 2007, where I prefer 4
March 2007 (see, for comparison, the user setting for dates in
Wikipedia).
--
Andy Mabbett
<http://www.pigsonthewing.org.uk/uFsig/>
Welcome to the world's longest week!
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
