Hello Toby
Toby A Inkster wrote:
Martin McEvoy wrote:
[...edit..]
this is a valid solution.
It is certainly valid in an SGML sense. And it does conform to the
HTML spec *if* you set the Content-Style-Type header. However, if you
do so, then any use of CSS in style attributes becomes non-conformant.
Sorry my example was a bad one I over simplified it...
the question I am posing is should microformats use their own
style-sheet language, vendor specific for microformats in order to
tackle the abbr design pattern issue, vendor specific extensions should
use this pattern,
'-' + vendor identifier + '-' + meaningful name
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata.html#vendor-keywords
which leads me to believe that publishers can do something like this...
<span class="bday" style="-uf-bday:1968-01-04;">4th Jan, 1968</span>
CSS parsers will just ignore the above markup as vendor specific, of
course It will not validate (because its not CSS), but I believe that
this is a lesser evil than stuffing the values into @title, a machine
wont choke on the data it will just ignore it, where as at the moment
people do choke on the data because it makes little sense to them, its
in the wrong place.
The ability to use CSS in style attributes being very handy,
I agree..
I don't think this is a very good solution.
I dont think the current abbr-design-pattern is a very good solution
either but what choices are there, I just want to fix it and not give
anyone an excuse not to publish microformats.
Best Wishes
Martin McEvoy
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
