James Craig wrote:
Due to opening up the pattern a bit more, there will also need to
be a flag to indicate when to use title attribute versus contents.
Something like this useTitle class:
No, this smells like a really bad idea. That class is now an
instruction for machines.
One of the
On 4/28/07 3:16 AM, Jeremy Keith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
James Craig wrote:
Due to opening up the pattern a bit more, there will also need to
be a flag to indicate when to use title attribute versus contents.
Something like this useTitle class:
No, this smells like a really bad idea. That
Tantek Çelik wrote:
In addition I think this is a case where a little bit of pain now with abbr
and some tools actually opens up the potential for *much* better
accessibility/usability tools (once UAs actually recognize ISO dates as such
and can speak/rewrite them for a user's
On Apr 27, 2007, at 9:54 AM, Keith Grennan wrote:
I agree. I really hope microformat won't turn into just another
term for semantic HTML. Clear communication is difficult enough
already without additional ambiguity.
I think it already has.
Of the mentions of microformats I see outside
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Scott
Reynen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
I can't prevent people from calling cats dogs either, but I'm
certainly going to say something when it happens.
This isn't case of people calling cats dogs; it's closer to the
dispute over whether a Jack Russell Terrier is a
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tantek Çelik
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
As I wrote on IRC yesterday:
I for one have always tried to push things (browsers, content) towards
at least being accessibility-friendly, and I still think that's a good
policy.
For the benefit of new list members, the IRC
Andy Mabbett wrote:
For the benefit of new list members, the IRC logs are at:
http://rbach.priv.at/Microformats-IRC/
The discussion referred to begins at:
http://rbach.priv.at/Microformats-IRC/2007-04-27#T154600
Cheers Andy.
I'm sorry, but this comment is revealing
tantek
Tantek wrote:
I concur with Jeremy - this is a really bad idea.
I think we can all agree that the addition of an extra class for the
benefit of parsers smells bad so we can probably ditch that
suggestion.
In addition, using span title is less semantic than abbr title thus
it is
Jeremy Keith wrote:
However, I'm against contorting microformats because of bugs or
suboptimal
behaviors in 1% marketshare browsers.
Normally I would agree with you here. But the situation with screen
readers is somewhat different. We're not talking about a regular browser
here: if someone
Jeremy,
I'd be interested in hearing if anyone else feels as strongly as I
do that the title-design-pattern is something that should codified
as soon as possible. I'd be even more interested in hearing if
there's anybody, like Tantek, who feels that it's a bad idea... or
to be more
Jeremy,
While certainly I am swayed by many of your well reasoned arguments, I must
point out one particular flaw:
1. Not backwards compatible with existing microformatted non-abbr elements.
On 4/28/07 2:12 PM, Jeremy Keith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd also like to point out one of the
Jeremy,
While certainly I am swayed by many of your well reasoned arguments, I must
point out one particular flaw:
1. Not backwards compatible with existing microformatted non-abbr elements.
On 4/28/07 2:12 PM, Jeremy Keith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd also like to point out one of the
Jeremy,
I'd be interested in hearing if anyone else feels as strongly as I
do that the title-design-pattern is something that should codified
as soon as possible. I'd be even more interested in hearing if
there's anybody, like Tantek, who feels that it's a bad idea... or
to be more accurate,
On 4/28/07 1:33 PM, Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tantek Çelik
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
As I wrote on IRC yesterday:
I for one have always tried to push things (browsers, content) towards
at least being accessibility-friendly, and I still think
On 4/28/07 7:22 PM, Tantek Çelik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't have a specific proposal here, other than pick one
element rather than all, and then I think it gives the other-element-title
pattern a better chance.
Tantek
Apologies for the incomplete duplicate that got sent prematurely.
Tantek Çelik wrote:
1. Not backwards compatible with existing microformatted non-abbr elements.
The problem is that there are already *non* abbr elements out there that
contain microformatted information in the element text *and* a title
attribute that is informational (e.g. for a tool tip).
On 4/28/07 8:04 PM, Patrick H. Lauke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tantek Çelik wrote:
1. Not backwards compatible with existing microformatted non-abbr elements.
The problem is that there are already *non* abbr elements out there that
contain microformatted information in the element text
17 matches
Mail list logo
