Andy Mabbett wrote:
Paul Wilkins writes
Our responsibility is to publish valid, semantically-meaningful markup,
not to pander to the former.
As the title is currently for screen readers or to disambiguate the
date, it should be kept in a human understandable format.
The Constitution of <abbr title="4 July 1776">4/7/76</abbr>
Then why doesn't that apply to dtstart and dtend, for example?
If we intend for a microformat to also understand what's going on, we
should disambiguate the title even further.
The Constitution of <abbr title="1776-07-04">4/7/76</abbr>
As long as the quotation is left unchanged, the additional information
is provided in a means that clearly disambiguates for the intended audience.
There is some very useful information from the Manual of Style on the
formatting of dates and numbers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_%28dates_and_numb
ers%29
The following is a direct quote of the relevant parts.
Incorrect date formats
[...]
That's "incorrect" according to the pretences of Wikipedia's
administrators; not by any other authority.
There are a number of style guides to pick from. The message I wanted to
get across is to try to ensure that it's consistant, for whichever style
you pick. That's what the wikipedia group are wanting to achieve and
they appear to have a very clear understanding of online writing style.
--
Paul Mark Wilkins
New Zealand Tourism Online
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
109 Tuam Street
Level 1
Christchurch 8011
New Zealand
+64 3 963 5039
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
