On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 6:47 PM, Dan Brickley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Toby A Inkster wrote:
Paul Wilkins wrote:
We should leverage the computers ability to do the hard work for us.
pDate span class=dateFriday, July the 11th 2008/span/p
As I've said before, although my parser does support
The premise that publishers will pick any old format is merely an
assertion with no evidence. Please show us an example somewhere else
where this has happened, or perhaps a better argument than merely
insisting on the obvious truth of it.
The way I see it, if they publish in the wrong
Breton Slivka wrote:
The premise that publishers will pick any old format is merely an
assertion with no evidence. Please show us an example somewhere else
where this has happened, or perhaps a better argument than merely
insisting on the obvious truth of it.
I have previously mentioned the
+1 for class=data-
Hidden metadata isn't going away anytime soon. HTML 5 features it,
RDF/RDFa uses it, the empty abbr pattern already does it, and many
others.
Best,
Zach Carter
On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Jason Karns [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The premise that publishers will pick any
On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 2:44 AM, Ameer Dawood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just one more thing to add. Microformats should be designed in such a
way that authors are not obliqued to wrrite up a spcific date format
for display to users. If we are to follow the idea of a
machine-readable as well as
On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 9:47 PM, Paul Wilkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With the current system authors are obliged to write up a specific
date format for computers to parse, as well as one for humans to read.
They should not have to produce both types on every occasion.
If a parser isn't able
