On Mar 29, 2006, at 1:53 PM, Alf Eaton wrote:
I just think it would be hard for a processor to process a
microformatted citation if it didn't know what type it was and thus
which elements to look for. If looking for a class="type" inside
the citation and getting the information from there is easier than
looking for a classname in the parent then fair enough.
It's not any easier. Any microformat parser must be able to read
class names. The question is whether "book" is data or metadata in
the context of a citation. If no one is publishing it, the answer
would seem to be metadata. But a lot of what we would normally
consider data is implied by strict citation formatting rules, and
XHTML doesn't have the same constraints.
To distinguish the people from editors or other contributors? You
could add that information into each person's hcard instead, but it
seems better this way. It could have an effect on the display
formatting too.
hcard's "role" was made for this type of labeling. The display
formatting could be handled by the include pattern:
<span class="vcard">
<span class="role" id="#a">Author</span>s:
<span class="n"><span class="family-name">Hochstein</span>, <abbr
title="Lorin" class="given-name">L</abbr></span>
</span> and
<span class="vcard">
<span class="n"><span class="family-name">Smith</span>, <abbr
title="Jane" class="given-name">J</abbr></span>
<object data="#a" class="include" type="text/html"></object>
</span>
That would display just like the <div class="authors"> container, and
it would have the added benefit of producing more descriptive
vcards. I don't yet see any advantage in not using hcard to describe
people and organizations in citations.
Peace,
Scott
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
