Of course this makes perfect sense with most places - like a hotel, or a human made landmark. But what about "natural" landmarks - like Mt Everest, which have a name, but for which vCard doesn't seem to me appropriate (as it's not "contact information").
At first glance, use of hCard does seem a bit of a stretch since the intention of hCard is to provide "contact information format for people, companies, and organizations". vCard in turn is "defined for representing and exchanging a variety of information about an individual". So it depends on whether a location or landmark can be personified in this way. A mental test might be "could the place ever have a 'business card'" or "would I ever store this information in an address book". On that basis, although a stretch it probably squeaks through. Thinking it through, a location could well have a phone number (eg. enquiries number for a national park containing a mountain) and a URL with more information. Although it would feel more natural to simply associate a name with the GEO or ADR (without implying a full hCard) I wouldn't say it's *incorrect*. So, on balance, ok in an hCard but.... only just :) Ben -- --- <http://weblog.200ok.com.au/> --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
