One of the main drivers behind uf is that they build on existing tools
and knowledge. Using existing html markup means people can use WYSIWYG
tools to edit them and it also removes a small psychological for people
who are comfortable with html but put off by such syntax. uf also aims
to solve simple and common problems, like events and contact info.
If you want more funtionality you can use things like eRDF.
Tatsuya Noyori wrote:
Hello,
I would like to suggest that microformats use namespace like the
following example.
<span xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml";
xmlns:mf="http://microformats.org/2007";>
<span mf:term="tel" mf:scheme="http://microformats.org/2007/hcard.rng";>
<span mf:term="type">home</span>
<span mf:term="value">+1.415.555.1212</span>
</span>
</span>
This example is just using @mf:scheme and @mf:term instead of
@xhtml:class or @xhtml:rel.
Therefore, this example is human readable and machine readable. And, by using
namespace and a link to schema(@mf:scheme), This example is able to be
valid by using validator and
schema(http://microformats.org/2007/hcard.rnc).
I think microformats need namespace to ensure interoperability.
How do you think about the suggestion?
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
