We seem to be straying behind the bikeshed a little bit here. My point
wasn't to point out problems with the examples given in "common idioms
without dedicated elements"
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/commands.html#conversations
The real problem is the definition of the <time> element itself:
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/text-level-semantics.html#the-time-element
This sentence:
"This element is intended as a way to encode modern dates and times in
a machine-readable way so that user agents can offer to add them to
the user's calendar."
...should be changed to:
"This element is intended as a way to encode modern dates and times in
a machine-readable way."
The overly-restrictive clause at the end canonises a single use case
as the only usage of the element. The fact that there examples
elsewhere in the spec that contradict this definition highlights the
problem, but the issue isn't with those examples; it's with the
definition of <time>.
HTH,
Jeremy
--
Jeremy Keith
a d a c t i o
http://adactio.com/
