From: "Andy Mabbett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On reflection, would it make more sense to reverse the "n" and "fn",
thus:
<TD class="fn">
<SPAN class="honorific-prefix">The Rt Hon</SPAN>
<SPAN class="n">Tony Blair</SPAN>
<SPAN class="honorific-suffix">MP</SPAN>
</TD>
?
No, for then
- fn is "The Rt Hon Tony Blair MP"
- n is "Tony Blair"
Neither of which are acceptable.
The former code is:
<TD class="n">
<SPAN class="honorific-prefix">The Rt Hon</SPAN>
<SPAN class="fn">Tony Blair</SPAN>
<SPAN class="honorific-suffix">MP</SPAN>
</TD>
which gives
- fn "Tony Blair"
- n honorific-prefix "The Rt Hon"
- n honorific-suffix "MP"
The rest of the name can be implied by <quote>allowing the "FN" property to
imply "N" property values in typical cases</quote>
My question to Brain is, even though we're being more explicit with the use
of the N property, should that permit us to then totally disregard any FN
information?
Who's responsibility is it to parse the information in FN.
given-name (space) family-name
family-name (comma) given-name
family-name (comma) given-name-first-initial
family-name (space) given-name-first-initial (optional period)
Is this to rest on the shoulders of people creating templates for their
pages, or can it be done consistantly and reliably by the tools that
interpret them.
--
Paul Wilkins
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
