On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 4:03 PM, Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > One more thing: I am unsure about the plural naming convention I suggested. > Apart from indicating if the value of a property can hold multiple values, > I don't see any added benefit right now. But I do see an unnecessary level > of complexity when it comes to parsing an hCard into a jCard. You would need > to know how to properly inflect a property, e.g. you cannot simply add an s > to "honorific-prefix". And whats the plural of adr anyway? Same for > converting plurals back into singulars. And since we want to represent an > hCard anyway, why should we deviate from the property names of an hCard, if > it's not adding any worthwhile benefit. So, back to singular?
Totally agreed, the only change to the hCard field names should be from hyphen-separated to camelCase (this transform is used in stylesheet attribute names in DOM so may be formally specified somewhere if it seems non-obvious enough we need to lay it out. There's very little utility in having the field names reflect their plurality - a parser needs to know how to parse each field separately anyhow, for most real-world applications. Keeping vCard names is more useful than changing them for very little gain. -Ciaran McNulty _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss