> > I think approaching ISO dates as metadata rather than content will remove > the need to compromise on core principles. >
I think you'll find that metadata of any kind is a comprimise of the "microformats core principles". It's information hiding, and the example that tantek uses is the "meta" tag, which is the prototypical failure of the metadata approach. Let's rewind a bit. The problem isn't necessarily that ISO dates aren't human readable. We've demonstrated that they are, as long as someone is familiar with the format and what it means. It's not fun, it's not friendly, so it violates the principle of "Humans first, machines second". That's an issue, but that's not the most important issue. The real problem that sparked this whole debate, is that they aren't machine readable. More specifically, they are read incorrectly by screen readers. Any solution that involves a quick snap judgement as to whether a peice of text is "legible" to a sighted human is irrelevant to that problem. We need to focus on solutions that target screen readers specifically, because that's what's wrong with the current solution. One way to approach this problem is to fix the screen readers. But we can't do that, so in the meantime, how about just an alternative date format that a screen reader converts to speech correctly? _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
