On Apr 22, 2007, at 10:12 PM, Manu Sporny wrote: > I propose that we use this collection-design-pattern mentioned > above for > specifying all collections due to the following advances over all > of the > other proposed methods:
Nice idea, but I believe it's redundant. HTML already has collections, ordered and unordered. Generic: <ul> <li>an item</li> <li>another item</li> </ul> Collection has a type: <ul class="things"> <li>an item</li> <li>another item</li> </ul> (which re-raises the question of whether class="xoxo" is desirable) Individuals have types: <ul> <li class="xthings">an item</li> <li class="ythings">another item</li> </ul> and the collection and/or individuals can have unique ids: <ul id="the_collection"> <li id="xthing">an item</li> <li id="ything">another item</li> </ul> Other relations can be expressed: <ul> <li id="xthing"><a href="#ything" rel="neighbour">an item</a></li> <li id="ything">another item</li> </ul> (probably not perfect, but I think it could be made to work) Specific definitions of the interpretation can be provided using a metadata profile, e.g. by providing an RDF mapping via GRDDL. What more is needed? Cheers, Danny. -- http://dannyayers.com _______________________________________________ microformats-new mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
