On May 3, 2007, at 4:53 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote:
In message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Ben
Wiley
Sittler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Q1 '07: span class=dtstart2007-01-01/span through span
class=dtend2007-04-01/span
In addition to Patrick's valid concerns about house style; I would
again
point out
I've done more testing with the spanned/title solution to an abbreviated
date time pattern, and finally confirmed Jon Gibbins' report. It seems
JAWS has a few nuances I didn't know about.
I was planning to 'bake' a forum and comment system with microformats
(hAtom hReview) and I'd prefer to get
Absalom Media wrote:
Obviously, if we're going to run with ISO8601, we need to include the
dashes as JAWS does read it better (which may require the usetitle
solution).
Any feedback on what would be an adequate common ground for this issue
as I want to start developing ?
While ISO 8601 is
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Paul Wilkins
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
The following from the proposal I suspect is errant.
abbr class=enddate title=2007-03-3131 January 2007/abbr
Were you after the following?
abbr class=enddate title=2007-01-3131 January 2007/abbr
Yes; I note that you've already
i think the abbr pattern is a valid one. moving the unambiguous
timestamp to some place humans can't see it is asking for it to be
removed be a third party (whether that is a screenreader, an html
sanitizer, or a web browser makes little difference.) and of course in
some cases you can get away
Ben Wiley Sittler wrote:
in
some cases you can get away with not using abbr:
Q1 '07: span class=dtstart2007-01-01/span through span
class=dtend2007-04-01/span
with hyphens it's reasonably human-readable. i've been using fully
punctuated iso 8601 date notation it everyday life (checks,
Yes, standardization takes a long time, and it's only clear in
retrospect that a standard has really stuck. In my opinion, the jury
is still out on ISO 8601...
However, using 8601 in an abbr title and your house style in the abbr
content should work just fine, right?
On 5/3/07, Patrick H. Lauke
Ben Wiley Sittler wrote:
However, using 8601 in an abbr title and your house style in the abbr
content should work just fine, right?
Yes, of course. Just wanted to add the concept that, as authors,
sometimes the content part of pages isn't fully up to us either :)
P
--
Patrick H. Lauke
In message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Ben Wiley
Sittler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Q1 '07: span class=dtstart2007-01-01/span through span
class=dtend2007-04-01/span
In addition to Patrick's valid concerns about house style; I would again
point out that dtend is exclusive; microformats currently (and
Yes, hence all these tricks to communicate the same data in two
different formats...
On 5/3/07, Patrick H. Lauke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ben Wiley Sittler wrote:
However, using 8601 in an abbr title and your house style in the abbr
content should work just fine, right?
Yes, of course. Just
just by the way, the current microformats behavior is in line with iso
8601's interval semantics from my reading of the specs.
On 5/3/07, Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Ben Wiley
Sittler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Q1 '07: span class=dtstart2007-01-01/span
From: Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In addition to Patrick's valid concerns about house style; I would again
point out that dtend is exclusive; microformats currently (and
wrongly, from a semantic and accessibility PoV) require:
Q1 '07: span class=dtstart2007-01-01/span through abbr
Q1 '07: span class=dtstart2007-01-01/span through abbr
class=dtend title=2007-04-022007-04-01/abbr
I have proposed a solution to this problem:
http://microformats.org/wiki/hcalendar-brainstorming#Simplification_of_date-end
I do agree that such counter-intuitive things could
Ben Buchanan wrote:
Hi Jeremy,
I'd be interested in hearing other arguments for or against
this idea.
I think it's a humans vs. machines issue. To my mind, the
ABBR element is there to provide additional information to
the user (the human). In this case, it's being used to add a
So, I started this response thinking How does a full-string timestamp /not/
disambiguate a March 2 date in the following?
My answer is: by not being human-readable :) The example in the
original post shows the problem:
abbr class=dtstart title=20070312T1700-06
March 12, 2007 at 5 PM, Central
Hi Jeremy,
I'd be interested in hearing other arguments for or against this idea.
I think it's a humans vs. machines issue. To my mind, the ABBR element
is there to provide additional information to the user (the human). In
this case, it's being used to add a timestamp in a format that I've
Hi everyone,
Have you seen this post over on the WaSP blog?
http://www.webstandards.org/2007/04/27/haccessibility/
It's a well-reasoned and calm look at the problems caused by the abbr
pattern in today's screenreaders (though some of the comments are a
little less calm). Rather than just
Jeremy wrote:
The simplest solution is to simply expand the pattern to allow the
same usage of class and title on elements other than abbr (span is
specifically mentioned but this would potentially apply to any element).
.
I'd be interested in hearing other arguments for or against
On 4/27/07 10:18 AM, John Beales [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jeremy wrote:
The simplest solution is to simply expand the pattern to allow the
same usage of class and title on elements other than abbr (span is
specifically mentioned but this would potentially apply to any element).
.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jeremy wrote:
The simplest solution is to simply expand the pattern to allow the
same usage of class and title on elements other than abbr (span is
specifically mentioned but this would potentially apply to any
element). . I'd be interested in hearing other
20 matches
Mail list logo
