Scott Reynen wrote:
On Apr 19, 2006, at 2:23 PM, Ryan King wrote:
That's right. The reason you can't collapse a 'vcard' class name and
its 'fn' class name is that it makes putting a 'vcard' class name
inside another one becomes ambiguous.
I've seen this explanation a few times, and I've never personally found
the separation of vcard and fn to be a problem, but I don't understand
the explanation. Couldn't the spec prevent such ambiguity simply by
stating that vcard and fn in the same node should be treated by parsers
as an fn node within the vcard node. More generally, why doesn't
nearest-in-parent [1] start with the current node rather than the parent
node?
[1] http://microformats.org/wiki/algorithm-nearest-in-parent
This is great place to continue this debate. The issue (as I understand
it) is that this optimization doesn't allow nested vcards:
<span class="vcard fn">[SPAM-DATA]</span>
The reason, as I see it, is that because you've asserted "fn",
[SPAN-DATA] can pretty well only be a FN because otherwise you're
asserting something that isn't true logically.
Thus, in terms of this particular optimization, there is no particular
need for worrying about nested vcards since it can't happen from a
logical point of view.
Regards, etc...
David
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
