Re: [uf-discuss] hCard multiple locations

[Andy Mabbett]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tantek Çelik
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes

>> I would too, but someone else may know of a good reason for limiting
>> it to one geo per hCard.
>
>In short: they mean different things.  As Kevin Marks pointed out, GEO
>is for physical location.

I don't know of many addresses which do not have a physical location.

If GW Bush has an hCard, with one adr for the White House and another
for Camp David, both have physical locations and both have coordinates.
Or are publishers expected to equip him with a homing device, and
dynamically update the coordinates of /his/ (as opposed to his
addresses') as he moves around?

What about companies, with physical locations in two or more cities?


>Similar questions have come up before thus I have gone ahead and added
>a new Q&A to the FAQ:
>
>http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard-faq#How_do_I_mark_up_each_ADR_with_a
>_GEO

I don't recall community consensus being reached on this issue (please
feel free to provide a URL if I'm wrong); and I don't think the matter
is as clear-cut as your edit implies.


The problem is that the geo currently relates to the subject of the
hCard and not to each adr within it.


Note also that publishers are *already* using coordinates (both in Geo,
and elsewhere) for entities other than points, such as buildings, hills,
lakes, cities, counties, etc.


I think this issue might need to go on:



if not:



or:





-- 
Andy Mabbett

___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] hCard multiple locations

[Ben Ward]

On 27 Aug 2007, at 14:54, Jason Karns wrote:

Although not relevant to the discussion, I believe I will continue to
mark up each physical address with its own GEO and let the parsers
extract what they will.  Unless, of course, a more appealing solution
or convincing argument is proposed.


This is possibly an application of the VCARD AGENT property?

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2426.txt (§3.5.4 AGENT Type Definition),  
and the VCARD-RDF implementation at: http://www.w3.org/TR/vcard-rdf  
(§3.6 Agent property).


This describes vcards within vcards, such as for employees of an  
organisation. However, it has never been put into practice in hCard,  
usually dismissed because popular desktop address book applications  
apparently do not handle AGENT.


It sounds reasonable that multiple entities for a business would be  
agents.


Ben
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] hCard multiple locations

[Jason Karns]

On 8/25/07, Tantek Çelik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> In short: they mean different things.  As Kevin Marks pointed out, GEO is
> for physical location.
>

Then we are still left with the issue of a business that has multiple
offices.  They are different physical locations and not merely
different mailing addresses for the same location.  One alternative
would be to mark them up as separate hcards (using the include pattern
for common information) but this feels wrong. Although it doesn't
technically violate the DRY principle, it would be violating the
spirit of the DRY principle by simply duplicating information for the
purpose additional GEO's.

Although not relevant to the discussion, I believe I will continue to
mark up each physical address with its own GEO and let the parsers
extract what they will.  Unless, of course, a more appealing solution
or convincing argument is proposed.

___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] hCard multiple locations

[Tantek Çelik]

On 8/24/07 3:08 PM, "Scott Reynen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Aug 24, 2007, at 11:37 AM, Jason Karns wrote:
> 
>> Sorry, I wasn't specific enough. I can have multiple ADR's per hCard
>> but if I want to add geo information to the hCard they must be
>> separate. Currently, hCard only supports 0 or 1 instances of geo in an
>> hCard.  But now that I think about it, is this not an issue with the
>> spec? If one can have multiple ADR's per hCard, shouldn't multiple
>> GEO's be valid as well? I would expect that one should be able to have
>> each ADR marked up with GEO coordinates as well.
> 
> I would too, but someone else may know of a good reason for limiting
> it to one geo per hCard.

In short: they mean different things.  As Kevin Marks pointed out, GEO is
for physical location.

>> Should this issue be added to the wiki?
> 
> There are at least two of us who don't understand the reason for that
> limitation, so I think it's worth documenting in the wiki:
> 
> http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard-issues

Similar questions have come up before thus I have gone ahead and added a new
Q&A to the FAQ:

http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard-faq#How_do_I_mark_up_each_ADR_with_a_GEO

Thanks,

Tantek

___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] hCard multiple locations

[Scott Reynen]

On Aug 24, 2007, at 11:37 AM, Jason Karns wrote:


Sorry, I wasn't specific enough. I can have multiple ADR's per hCard
but if I want to add geo information to the hCard they must be
separate. Currently, hCard only supports 0 or 1 instances of geo in an
hCard.  But now that I think about it, is this not an issue with the
spec? If one can have multiple ADR's per hCard, shouldn't multiple
GEO's be valid as well? I would expect that one should be able to have
each ADR marked up with GEO coordinates as well.


I would too, but someone else may know of a good reason for limiting  
it to one geo per hCard.



Should this issue be added to the wiki?


There are at least two of us who don't understand the reason for that  
limitation, so I think it's worth documenting in the wiki:


http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard-issues

Peace,
Scott

___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] hCard multiple locations

[Jason Karns]

On 8/24/07, Scott Reynen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Multiple ADR in a single hCard is valid (though multiple LOCALITY in
> a single ADR is not) .  Have you tried it and found parsers don't
> support it?  If so, it may be helpful to document which parsers are
> ignoring multiple ADR.
>

Sorry, I wasn't specific enough. I can have multiple ADR's per hCard
but if I want to add geo information to the hCard they must be
separate. Currently, hCard only supports 0 or 1 instances of geo in an
hCard.  But now that I think about it, is this not an issue with the
spec? If one can have multiple ADR's per hCard, shouldn't multiple
GEO's be valid as well? I would expect that one should be able to have
each ADR marked up with GEO coordinates as well.

Should this issue be added to the wiki?
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] hCard multiple locations

[Scott Reynen]

On Aug 24, 2007, at 9:38 AM, Jason Karns wrote:


I'm having an issue with an hcard that has multiple locations.  Since
having multiple locations nested in the hcard would result in only one
location being exported (others ignored/overwritten) I'm trying to use
the include pattern to make each location its own hcard and then
include the fn/org properties.


Multiple ADR in a single hCard is valid (though multiple LOCALITY in  
a single ADR is not) .  Have you tried it and found parsers don't  
support it?  If so, it may be helpful to document which parsers are  
ignoring multiple ADR.



However, this seems to be resulting in
a lot of extraneous wrapper elements (2 wrappers and an 'include' link
for *each* location). Suggestions?


I have three:

1) Unless you're doing something special with that id="cities">, you don't need to use the include pattern to put the FN  
in the first hCard; you could just put it in the actual hCard.


2) It shouldn't hurt anything, but FN isn't really part of ADR, so  
you should probably include it outside the ADR.


3) I think using  with your LOCALITY like that will result in  
the city names being replaced by the GEO coordinates, just as "Saint  
Louis" would be the LOCALITY value resulting from this: class="locality" title="Saint Louis">STL.  If you want GEO to  
take the  title, but LOCALITY to keep the element content  
value, you probably need even more wrapping, e.g.: title="35.230437;-80.838467">Charlotteabbr>.


It's unfortunate we need so much markup, but as long as every bit of  
that additional markup is communicating something new, that's as  
efficient as we can get.


Peace,
Scott

___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss