On Mar 8, 2007, at 9:04 AM, Ara Pehlivanian wrote:
Very clearly articulated. Kudos. I think that the only thing that
might be missing there (and maybe I'm just stating the obvious) is the
need to express which convention you're applying when using the class
value "family-name", i.e. Microformats. That way there won't be any
confusion in situations when for example, a product manufacturer
releases a list of their products "by family" and marks up their
content with the class "family-name", which isn't intended as a
Microformat and could be confused by a consuming agent. Perhaps a
namespace/schema is required to round off your example.
What say you?
In the HTML examples, we're currently using (or recommending anyway)
profile URIs for such disambiguation [1], as namespaces are
"considered harmful" [2]. The XML examples may require namespaces,
but that's generally outside the scope of microformats, which are
written specifically for use in (X)HTML [3]. If you're interested in
such disambiguation, I'd encourage you to get involved in the ongoing
thread on the subject, unfortunately titled "Microformat tools
bogosity test."
[1] http://microformats.org/wiki/profile-uris
[2] http://microformats.org/wiki/namespaces-considered-harmful
[3] http://microformats.org/about/
Peace,
Scott
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
