Tantek Çelik wrote:
>On 2/1/06 2:27 PM, "John Panzer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Would this be acceptable as a structured "fn"?
>>
>><a class="item fn" href="..."><abbr title="NYSE:TWX">Time Warner,
>>Inc.</abbr></a>
>
>
>Well, you could use that markup, but there are several questionable things
>going on here.
>...
>
>2. Both "NYSE" and "TWX" are abbreviations and thus proper use of <abbr>
>requires that they be *inside* the abbr rather than an attribute. e.g.
>
><abbr title="New York Stock Exchange, Time Warner Inc. common
>stock">NYSE:TWX</abbr>
>
Hm. I disagree with this, or at least I need a clarification. I don't
see a fundamental difference between using <abbr title="NYSE:TWX">Time
Warner</abbr> and using <abbr title="20050125">January 25th</abbr>? [1]
Specificially, in this particular context, "Time Warner" is the simple,
human readable, friendly, but possibly ambiguous abbreviation of the
stock ticker symbol NYSE:TWX. Just as "January 25th" is the simple,
human readable, but ambiguous abbreviation of "20050125".
The key distinction here is that I'm not using NYSE or TWX as
abbreviations for anything in this particular context; together they're
forming a unique identifier whose constituents happen to map pretty well
to certain English words. But they don't always; there was a time period
when "AOL" was the NYSE ticker symbol for the company officially named
"Time Warner".
From http://microformats.org/wiki/cite for example:
> Finally, if the format of the data according to the original schema
is too long and/or not human-friendly, use <abbr> instead of a generic
structural element, and place the literal data into the 'title'
attribute (where abbr expansions go), and the more brief and human
readable equivalent into the element itself.
[1] http://tantek.com/log/2005/01.html#d26t0100
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
