On Jun 15, 2007, at 8:15 AM, Dougal Campbell wrote:
Okay, so I started a new job recently.
The web site and service has a lot to do with SEO. But despite
that, the
HTML is a mess of table-based layout and tag soup. I'm hoping I can
change that in time, but it won't happen quickly. But one
Ben Wiley Sittler wrote:
i agree, but you should be aware that microformats are only specified
to work in xhtml pages (so e.g. it needs parse as xml), not in html
pages
Is this actually the case? The wiki seems to be a little ambiguous on
the topic, sometimes referring to “open microformat
On 6/18/07, David Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Granted, the behaviour can't be guaranteed in the case of a
non-compliant document, but are Microformats actually specified as
working in valid, but non-XML-compliant, HTML markup? Surely the only
requirement should be that the markup can be
David Thompson wrote:
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 3:26 AM
To: Microformats Discuss
Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] uF dumped in tag soup?
Ben Wiley Sittler wrote:
i agree, but you should be aware that microformats are only
specified
to work in xhtml pages (so e.g. it needs parse as xml
Joe Andrieu wrote:
I believe that the problem is that more than a few of the parsers use XSLT
operating on the file itself, rather than a DOM. Relying
on a browser to parse the (X)HTML into a DOM is convenient, but it is also
expensive architecturally, especially when doing
server-side
David Thompson
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 6:41 AM
To: Microformats Discuss
Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] uF dumped in tag soup?
Joe Andrieu wrote:
I believe that the problem is that more than a few of the
parsers use
XSLT operating on the file itself, rather than a DOM. Relying
