On 3/5/08 5:02 AM, "Toby A Inkster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, implied headers like this while lowering the barrier to entry for > authors, would considerably raise the barrier for parsers -- mostly because > of colspan and rowspan, which would be an absolute pain to handle. Speaking from the experience of working on a browser rendering engine which *did* have to handle colspan and rowspan, I can certainly state that requiring a microformats parser to perform a table layout (effectively what it takes to support colspan and rowspan) would *drastically* raise the effort necessary and would introduce numerous opportunities for subtle bugs and incompatibilities. I think it would be reasonable to adopt a design principle of *not* requiring microformat parsers to perform a table layout, even if it can be used to make inferring semantics easier. > Although microformats' general principle is to place the burden of effort > onto parsers, implied headers via the scope attribute may shift the effort > *too* far in that direction. What do others think? Yes, very much so too far in that direction. Thanks, Tantek _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
