On Dec 15, 2007, at 3:08 AM, Ciaran McNulty wrote:
It seems to me "3:23" is already
machine-readable
Does 3:23 mean 3 mins 23 seconds, or 3 hours 23 mins, or 23 minutes
past three o'clock? ;-)
My point is it's not productive to ask such questions outside the
context of the actual problem,
On Dec 15, 2007 8:21 AM, Ben Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Agreed. I'll repost something I put into the GEO thread last week.
> It's quoting directly from the HTML4 specification. This doesn't
> actually need to have any concern with accessibility, or assistive
> technology tools. Frankly, the
On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 16:23 -0800, Tantek =?ISO-8859-1?B?xw==?=elik
wrote:
> On 12/14/07 3:55 PM, "Martin McEvoy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 23:18 +, Martin McEvoy wrote:
> >> I do NOT however believe that machine data should be displayed in a
> >> people area such
On Sat, 2007-12-15 at 13:36 +1300, Paul Wilkins wrote:
> On Dec 15, 2007 1:21 PM, Martin McEvoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sat, 2007-12-15 at 12:33 +1300, Paul Wilkins wrote:
> > > On Dec 15, 2007 12:18 PM, Martin McEvoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > you could perhaps do PT3:23 ? which
In message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul
Wilkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
The least that could be got away with is 00:03:23, at which point it
would be a toss up between that or PT3M23S
Both of the above formats are valid and should be accepted by parsers
as a part of the ISO 8601 time/date f
On Dec 15, 2007 1:40 AM, Scott Reynen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It seems to me "3:23" is already
> machine-readable
Does 3:23 mean 3 mins 23 seconds, or 3 hours 23 mins, or 23 minutes
past three o'clock? ;-)
-Ciaran McNulty
___
microformats-discuss m
On 12/14/07 3:55 PM, "Martin McEvoy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 23:18 +, Martin McEvoy wrote:
>> I do NOT however believe that machine data should be displayed in a
>> people area such as @title, I think machine data can be stored
>> elsewhere
>> in a document such as i
On Dec 14, 2007, at 12:21 PM, Ben Ward wrote:
I am going to ask that we better define the problem. That we follow
up the demand for a better pattern (regardless of whether your
personal motivation is following the spec or assistive technology).
I'd like to ask that people stop jumping strai
On Dec 15, 2007 1:36 PM, Paul Wilkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 15, 2007 1:21 PM, Martin McEvoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > hmm are you sure? 3:23 is expressed as whole plus a decimal fraction
>
> That's if you use a comma or a fullstop. With the full colon it's
> interpreted as hours
On Dec 15, 2007 1:21 PM, Martin McEvoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-12-15 at 12:33 +1300, Paul Wilkins wrote:
> > On Dec 15, 2007 12:18 PM, Martin McEvoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > you could perhaps do PT3:23 ? which seems more accurate
> > Then it won't be able to be parsed as a
On Sat, 2007-12-15 at 12:33 +1300, Paul Wilkins wrote:
> On Dec 15, 2007 12:18 PM, Martin McEvoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sat, 2007-12-15 at 10:13 +1300, Paul Wilkins wrote:
> > > I think you're right. It should be P3M23S instead.
> >
> > I dont think thats its possible to drop the *T*
>
On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 23:18 +, Martin McEvoy wrote:
> I do NOT however believe that machine data should be displayed in a
> people area such as @title, I think machine data can be stored
> elsewhere
> in a document such as in the in a list of 's or 's
No but seriously, with my web designer h
On Dec 15, 2007 12:18 PM, Martin McEvoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-12-15 at 10:13 +1300, Paul Wilkins wrote:
> > I think you're right. It should be P3M23S instead.
>
> I dont think thats its possible to drop the *T*
You're right, the T has to be there to resolve any ambiguity betwee
On Sat, 2007-12-15 at 10:13 +1300, Paul Wilkins wrote:
> On Dec 15, 2007 9:19 AM, Martin McEvoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 19:21 +, Ben Ward wrote:
> > > '3:23' IS NOT an
> > > abbreviation of the string 'PT3M23S' (hAudio).
>
> I think you're right. It should be P3M23
On 12/14/07 1:13 PM, "Paul Wilkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Will you be contesting the date pattern as well? If the date pattern
> is acceptable then the time pattern is directly acceptable as well
> through the very same standards.
Not necessarily.
In fact, it has been reasonably hypothesi
On Dec 15, 2007 9:19 AM, Martin McEvoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 19:21 +, Ben Ward wrote:
> > '3:23' IS NOT an
> > abbreviation of the string 'PT3M23S' (hAudio).
I think you're right. It should be P3M23S instead.
> A couple of us involved in the brainstorming and afte
On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 19:21 +, Ben Ward wrote:
> ‘3:23’ IS NOT an
> abbreviation of the string ‘PT3M23S’ (hAudio).
A couple of us involved in the brainstorming and after, Myself and Andy
I think recommended that the duration class should just be expressed as
3:23
Its enough for hAudio I
On 14 Dec 2007, at 14:06, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:
I think all of the following would be misuses of ABBR and TITLE:
| Combien d'œufs ai-je vendre? J'ai vendu
| 45 aujourd'hui.
| Combien d'œufs ai-je vendre? J'ai vendu 45 aujourd'hui.
| Combien d'œufs ai-je vendre? J'ai vendu 45 aujourd'hu
18 matches
Mail list logo
