Scott Reynen wrote: > On Mar 2, 2007, at 2:40 PM, Michael MD wrote: > > > I don't see how special cases where something has to be extracted > > in a different way are expressed in the profiles. > > Michael didn't see how that was expressed in profiles because it's > *not* expressed in the profiles. That doesn't mean profile URIs > aren't useful, just that they don't solve the problem of > communicating parsing instructions.
Scott, I think different profile URIs do express "where something has to be extracted in a different way." Different profile URIs can mean different extraction rules. The rules are not actually in the profiles themselves, but the use of profile URIs does what Michael was asking about. As I understand it, the profile itself need not even be dereferenced by consuming applications. In that way, it is more of an identifier than a locator. And in fact, profile URIs are the only mechanism we have for version control. So if parsing rules change with a new version, the only way a consuming app would know to apply the new/old parsing is because of the profile URI. For context, Michael's original question in the archive is at http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-discuss/2007-March/008891.html -j -- Joe Andrieu [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1 (805) 705-8651 "An inconvenience is an adventure wrongly considered. An adventure is only an inconvenience rightly considered." --G. K. Chesterton _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
