Howdy again! :) On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Stephen Paul Weber <singpol...@singpolyma.net> wrote: > Sorry, just going to point out again (pet peeve of mine), there are no "CSS > classes", only "HTML classes". :P
Doh! Sorry, I did not catch that the first time. :( My tendency is to say CSS classes when referring to the values of the "class" attribute of an html tag; I think that's why I call it a class - I am referring to the value(s) of the HTML class attribute. Lol, sorry for my ignorance if I used the wrong term(s). > The class attribute is itself a "data format", encoding types that the > element matches. The fact that people happen to style classes with CSS is > sort of irrelevant: if I used microdata I would style microdata attributes > using CSS as well. I hear what you are saying and that's a good observation. I think we're talking about two different things here. :D I agree and understand everything you have said. With that said, I don't think that there's anything wrong with me not liking the fact that microformats use HTML classes. For me, simply put, it's more about clutter and readability. Based on my few tests within the last couple days, microdata just seems more clean. Again, what the heck do I know... I'm open minded... I think I need to spend some more time playing with the two formats. :) >>Going back to the microdata FAQ: >>"...reuse of the class tag can cause conflicts with website CSS." >>I think they make a good point there. > > Only if you somehow (a) can't change your CSS and (b) never style with > anything other than classes. Like I said above: I would use CSS on > itemprop/itemtype as well, in which case their use affects my styles as > well. Interesting! I don't think I would style itemprop/itemtype... I guess I'm oldschool like that. :D About not being able to change your CSS: I think it depends on the situation/context. At my current job, I work with around 20 third party companies where my CSS and HTML templates are hosted on their servers and mixed-in with their CSS and HTML; based on my experience, it's best for me to namespace my CSS classes to avoid style conflicts. With 100% of these third party companies, there's always some amount of their CSS that I can't touch. >>(I even bought the >>Microformat book when it first came out) > There's a book? That's weird... I know, right! :D "Microformats: the book" <http://microformats.org/2007/04/19/microformats-the-book> >>On the other hand, who's to say one can't use both? Right? > Sure, you can definitely use both. > So, in the end it's your own choice, I'll just outline breifly why I prefer > microformats: Those are very good reasons to use microformats. I'm going to let this all sink in and experiment with both. Thanks so much for your pro tips and advice Stephen, I really appreciate it. Also, sorry to the original poster for my hijacking of the thread. :( Have a nice day all! Cheers, Micky _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
