Martin McEvoy wrote: > The first thing I spotted was that someone seems to have spammed the > word "track" 100's of times all over our model examples and results, > making them as far as i can see unusable, Vandalized almost
Martin, I wish you had said something before going and doing all that hard work (not that it wasn't useful). The site is not vandalized, I used those names when merging from the old, manual way of doing things to the new Microformalyze way of doing things. There was no data loss. There were numerous namespace collisions between the terms we were using to identify properties for albums and tracks. For example, we had used "title" to denote the name for albums and tracks... obviously, if we merged both records, we wouldn't be able to tell which one was the album title and which one was the track title... so I wrote a script to convert it to "album title" and "track title". There is no foul play going on here... however, if you think there is, you're more than welcome to quadruple check the work (it has already been triple checked). Whether track or choon is used on the examples page, however, is of no consequence to the discussion. The names on the examples pages have almost nothing to do with the names that we pick for the actual proposal. When analyzing websites on any examples page, we must ensure that we use common property names when performing the analysis of the data. We need to perform apples-to-apples comparisons. In other words, if we say that websites A and B have PROPERTY_FOO, then we will use PROPERTY_FOO across analysis write-ups to denote if the websites do or do not have PROPERTY_FOO. I decided to use track because it was the most obvious choice (to me) at the time... however, that decision has no bearing on the current discussion. -- manu _______________________________________________ microformats-new mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
