On 19 Feb 2006, at 15:54, Ryan Cannon wrote:
I like your use of space-separated class names (e.g. citation
reference book), but you do have a little bit of redundancy:
- <abbr> implies an abbreviation, so class="journal-title-abbr"
could just be "journal-title"
That's true, but it's going to be easier for parsers to use the class
name to differentiate rather than having to look at the node name as
well, so the redundancy might be worthwhile.
- <li id="ref16"><a name="ref16"> is redundant and may be (not
sure) illegal.
THe (X)HTML validator doesn't seem to complain, so I think it's ok.
The thing is, the <li> surrounds the citation, so needs an
identifier, but there also needs to be an anchor link in the page. I
think you can ignore the internal anchor links as far as semantics
go: they're only really useful for page navigation, as they don't
wrap anything useful.
I also question the extensive use of IDs in general. Using ID
fields is extremely limiting. How, for example, could one page
contain multiple articles, or sections of an article, or only
article metadata (such as an abstract list), if these fields
require IDs?
That's a very good point. I was thinking that I could use ids for
sections that commonly only appeared once per article, like
abstracts, introduction, bibliography, etc, but you're right, with
more than one article on a page that won't work. I guess it'll have
to be classes throughout.
It seems to me that the main part of getting a scholarly (not just
scientific) article microformat would be hCite/citation
microformat, and a metadata format (possibly related to Dublin
Core??).
There is more than that, particularly when you want to include the
actual data, but yes, the main parts so far are a) metadata, b)
citations and c) common article sections (ie the structure of the
paper itself).
alf.
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
