Hello Martin,
On 8/23/07, Martin McEvoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> > Just because you can identify someone (or some group) by a phone
> > number doesn't make that their "name".
> >
> > It's like... you can identify someone by their SIN (... or Social
> > Security # in the USA)... but that does NOT make that their name. And
> > thus you would NOT put a "fn" on that.
>
> FN [1] represents the name of the object not a person so to speak
>
> so the use of fn in Andys example is fair use I would say.
In the example we had, as I understood it, this is a telephone number
of a person or a company.
So... the "object" is either a person or a company.
And given that, I would say that it isn't "fair" to apply the "fn" to
the telephone number, since it is NOT the name of a person or object.
I do understand what you are saying... that the telephone number if
the object (and not a person or a company)... but I don't think that
is what the website that that came from is shooting for. Correct me
if I'm wrong though... but seems that the number is suppose to belong
to some person or company.
See ya
--
Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. <http://ChangeLog.ca/>
Vlog Razor... Vlogging News
http://vlograzor.com/
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
