On [Jun 28], at [ Jun 28] 11:09 , Ben Ward wrote:
On 28 Jun 2008, at 17:03, Ed Lucas wrote:
George Brocklehurst wrote:
Is it worth revisiting Tantek's original suggestion of using the
object element to represent dates? [1]
The idea was to do something like this:
<object data="20050125">January 25</object>
This particular example is invalid, as the data="" attribute must
contain a URI, and a URI cannot start with a number.
About a week ago I wrote:
On the abbr-design-pattern page, markup rejections section [1] is
the following text:
OBJECT with param value. (requires significant extra markup and CSS
in order to *behave* correctly)
Can anyone provide more detail about this parenthetical rejection
explanation?
If this problem has in fact been resolved (or at least improved) in
more recent browser versions, I suggest we look again at using
<object> and <param> together, e.g.:
<object class="dtstart"><param name="value" value="20050125" /
>January 25</object>
I expect using <param> will result in more readable and flexible
markup than data URIs.
Peace,
Scott
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
