As I understand the uf principles[1] "further development of the microformat" shouldn't be a goal in itself. Further development of some practical solution to some real problem should be the goal.
Sure, it shouldn't be a goal in itself - but in this case I am confident there will be further issues that could be solved by evolution of the uf. So I think a reasonable goal would be "don't make it impossible to develop the uf any further" :)
OK, that seems clear to me, but why does it matter that we do this? What's a parser going to *do* once it understands numbers and currency symbols? As others have asked in this thread, what's the use case?
Once the parser can identify the *definite* unit of currency, it can do reliable translations for the user and/or indexing/scraping services (just as examples). People have cited Greasemonkey extensions which already do this by making assumptions - commonly, assuming that "$" means "USD". The existence of the extensions suggests that there is demand for the solution; which in turn suggests it might be a good idea to have some way of feeding explicitly-specified units to the parser/UA. Theoretically this could be addressed with a more general "define the unit of a number" uf; but that does open a lot more questions. As an aside; that could go something like.... <p class="figure"> <a href="URL defining unit" class="unit">name/code/etc of unit</span> <span class="sign">symbol or abbreviation which represents unit</span> <span class="amount">12345</span> </p> cheers, Ben -- --- <http://www.200ok.com.au/> --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss