On Jun 8, 2007, at 11:35 AM, Manu Sporny wrote:
Brian Suda wrote:
On 6/8/07, Scott Reynen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This is the same problem with re-using any class name in multiple
microformats. As mentioned earlier, if we re-use "summary" in
haudio
(which I'm not arguing for nor against here), what if we want to
embed haudio inside hreview?
SUMMARY is defined as:
A short summary or subject for the object.
I think Scott's point is that we have the same problem using
'summary',
as we do with using 'title', as we do with using 'fn'.
if you have
media
hcard
title#1
title#2
then title#1 will be used for the media, NOT title#2
Egad! I had no idea that is what the community meant by "no
namespace"... to programmers what you have described is a scope-less,
procedural language. Am I misunderstanding you? Do Microformats use a
scope-less design paradigm? Am I waaaaaay off here (I hope I am):
Yes. No name scoping. Only context scoping. And contexts can overlap.
Variable Scoping
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_scoping
Therefore, the example you give above would boil down to these
assignment statements in a finite state machine (ie: the parser):
media.title = title#1
media.hcard.title = title#1
This isn't a useful analogy. Microformats are not a programming
language anymore than HTML is a programming language (though some may
think it is) [1]. HTML is a document language and, in some ways a
data source for applications (web applications, if you will).
One of the things that works well in microformats and related
technologies is that the vocabularies are collapsed into a flat list.
This means that when you see a term you can know what it means,
without knowing much more about the context in which is appears.
-ryan
1. http://webdesign.about.com/b/a/255718.htm
_______________________________________________
microformats-new mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
