On Feb 1, 2006, at 5:01 PM, John Panzer wrote:
Ryan King wrote on 2/1/2006, 3:49 PM:
...
Unless we have significant research which demonstrates a specific
behavior here, I would not be inclined to do anything special for
stocks (beyond a normal product/business review).
I think there are really two questions here:
(1) What's the right way for us to review a stock, and (given that we
have a requirement to identify the ticker symbol) the right way to let
us add those semantic classnames without breaking the microformat?
(2) Is there any interest in standardizing on the classname(s) used in
#1 so the result would be useful to other people?
I can easily see us getting an consensus on #1 and a "No" to #2, which
would be fine.
For now, I'd say follow the advice from question #9 of http://
microformats.org/wiki/hreview-faq. If, after several grounds try that
approach, we find that there are gaps between that practice and how
people publish this stuff, we can look at finding a way to describe
stocks on the web.
-ryan
--
Ryan King
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
