Looking at the examples on the wiki page, there is nothing that precludes a taggedlink inside the description. Any parser I ever wrote for this looked for an element with xfolkentry and then appropriate corresponding elements under that. How those elements were nested did not matter?
As Ryan points out, xfolkentry is assumed to denote a container tag with everything else underneath it. Bud On 10/31/06, Jeremy Boggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A question about xFolk:[1] Is it invalid to include the TAGGEDLINK inside the DESCRIPTION, and as a value of the same class attribute as used for the XFOLKENTRY? My example code: <div class="xfolkentry description"> <p>Joi Ito asks, <a href="http://joi.ito.com/archives/2006/10/22/ is_youtube_web_20.html">Is YouTube "Web 2.0"</a> as a follow-up to a post by Lawrence Lessig, <a href="http://lessig.org/blog/archives/ 003570.shtml" class="taggedlink">"The Ethics of Web 2.0."</a> Lessig specifically differentiates between "true sharing" and "fake sharing." For Lessig, YouTube is a "fake sharing" site because it does not allow users to download content; all traffic is directed back to YouTube, thus YouTube, not the users, essentially controls the content.</p> </div> thanks! Jeremy [1] http://microformats.org/wiki/xfolk _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
-- Bud Gibson cell: 734-657-4800 web: http://thecommunityengine.com _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
