On 1/13/07, Tim White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In message
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Michael
>McCracken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>
>>are the people who are voting for "hCite"
>>intending the capital C?
>
>Not me:
>
> hCite = uF name
> hcite = root class name
>
I concur with Andy. I was refereeing to hCite as the name.
Seems we are reaching consensus on hcite as the root.
+1 hcite
I agree that this seems like a consensus on 'hcite' as the root class name.
I have updated the examples on citation-brainstorming to reflect this,
and added a note to the working straw schema.
There is a note about using <cite> as the recommended root element - I
don't feel strongly about this - does anyone else? I suppose a final
standard should have a note to suggest using <cite> when appropriate,
but I'm not concerned about it now.
However, I still have my original question -- at one point there were "cite" and
"citation" explorations going on. I believe the "cite" was related to blog posting
(citing one post in another). Has this been renamed?
I, for one, don't know.
-mike
--
Michael McCracken
UCSD CSE PhD Candidate
research: http://www.cse.ucsd.edu/~mmccrack/
misc: http://michael-mccracken.net/wp/
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
