First, a URL for the wiki page you are referring to would be helpful ;-)
On 9/25/06, Michael McCracken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
option 1: requires class names for every reference type. I don't like
this option either.
option 2: uses type class, but makes it confusing IMO - what if you
want to include more data about the containing reference than just one
element? Does the type continue to influence sibling elements until
another type element cancels it out?
Can't comment on the above since I don't know the context.
I have another option that might work:
option 3: nest ufs. I've used this a few times in examples without
anyone commenting on it. Is this OK? What are the pros/cons? I have
parsed HTML using a DOM traversal before, and this seems like it'd be
reasonably easy to parse. It's also a little easier to write and more
obvious than #2, IMO, since it's clear that the elements under the
container span are all referring to the item that's of type book...
<span class="citation"><span class="type">chapter</span>:
<span class="title">stuff</span>
<span class="citation container"><span class="type">book</span>
<span class="title">A collection of stuff</span>
I thnk that's fine, notwithstanding my other quetion about the "type"
span (which seems even more funky in this case). Also, "citation"
could probably be "hcite"?
Bruce
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
