Lachlan Hunt wrote:
we could introduce the edit and datetime attributes from the XHTML
2.0 draft's Edit Attributes Module [1].
I just realised that the datetime attribute from the Edit module would
clash with the proposed datetime attribute of the <t> element [1].
e.g. What would the datetime attribute mean in this?
<t edit="inserted" datetime="2006-08-31">31 Aug 2006</t>
It could either mean that the markup was inserted on 2006-08-31 or that
the content is a date equivalent to 2006-08-31.
A possible solution could be to keep edit and datetime attributes for
editing and rename the datetime attribute for the <t> element to
something else (e.g. dt)
e.g. <t dt="2006-08-31">31 Aug 2006</t>
<t dt="2006-08-31" edit="inserted" datetime="2006-09-01T12:30Z">31 Aug
2006</t>
The problem with that is that authors may get confused and use datetime
instead of dt, or vice versa.
Alternatively, we could use the title attribute instead.
e.g. <t title="2006-08-31">31 Aug 2006</t>
That has the advantage of actually making the ISO date accessible to
users using the existing tooltip mechansim and is similar to the current
abuse of the <abbr> element for the datetime microformat [2].
[1] http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#the-t
[2] http://microformats.org/wiki/datetime-design-pattern
--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/
