On Mon, June 11, 2007 5:47 pm, Ross Gardler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On 11/06/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=546173 >> Log: >> allow multiple definitions of glossary items (thanks to Oshani Seneviratne >> FOR-1006) > > Great stuff Oshani, some minor comments... > >> + <em class="bold"> > > Why em class="bold"? the class does nothing since there is no addition > to the CSS. Why not <strong> or <em>? You're right. I should've used <strong> instead. > >> + <dl class="{local-name(.)}" id="{skos:prefLabel/text()}"> > > <dl> etc. is not valid, see FOR-1009. I see that. I'll study the DTD and make a choice accordingly. > > Also, what is the intention of the class attribute here and elsewhere. > There is no addition to the CSS files so this is meaningless at this > time. I don't think it's meaningless. I used class attributes to give meaning to the generated content. Before the term 'Microformats' was coined, it was difficult to explain why I systematicallly use class attributes, but it's now rather easy. I personally share Norm's views [1] on microformats. It'd be ideal to generate content according to a microformat but I haven't come across any for glossaries. It's true that I always have CSS in mind while generating content but it doesn't mean that CSS is immediately going to be applied; that can come later and adapt itself to the markup. > > I suspect that this content is cut and paste from somewhere else. I > committed it anyway as it is a very small amount of code, however, be > careful about cut an paste code, it introduces errors and can give us > problems from an ownership perspective. > > All code you commit must be your own code, or must be license > compatible, in which case we need to ensure we satisfy all licence > conditions. > No, it's not cut and paste. SinDoc [1] http://norman.walsh.name/2005/09/05/microformats
