Fair enough, though I note it's particularly useful in this instance because there's an enumerated value being encoded.
Let me posit this: using ABBR to provide the machine coded value is useful when the value is from a constained vocabulary or syntax. Regards, etc... David On 9/27/06, Ryan King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've found more and more places where it's useful. For example: <div class="vcard"> ... <span class="tel"> <abbr class="type" title="cell">mobile</abbr> <span class="value">...</span> </span> ... </div> With tel type, et al, we have a limit list of values from the RFCs. Sometimes you don't want to use precisely that term. > I'd be much happier if there was a general rulle across all > microformats that said this was the way to handle ABBRs, either > universally or "in these specific cases". > > So where does that leave us? Out of hAtom 0.1 and mulling it over > for hAtom 0.2. There isn't currently a general rule. Or, at least, we haven't specified it. However, in my parsing code and test cases (http://microformats.org/ tests/), I've implemented [EMAIL PROTECTED] parsing for everything except for fields that expect a url. -ryan
_______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
