On [Sep 2], at [ Sep 2] 11:52 , David Janes wrote:
hItem/item was intended to do more than that -- it was to bring in a
number of commonly used class names (e.g. "fn") so we don't have these
year long discussions about how to do things that really the answer is
already known.
I completely misunderstood the intent of this proposal as being
specific to physical objects and commerce. Now that I understand this
proposal better, I prefer it to MFO, as it puts the emphasis on the
content being published (where it belongs) rather than on parsing
rules. I'll retract my earlier suggestion to build on the MFO work
and instead suggest building on the item work:
http://microformats.org/wiki/items-brainstorming
Further, I propose merging the two, as they're basically the same
proposal from two different angles.
--
Scott Reynen
MakeDataMakeSense.com
_______________________________________________
microformats-new mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
