Currency microformat

--- Tantek Çelik <tantekcs.stanford.edu> wrote:

> I think it has not yet been shown by sufficient
research
> that a "currency at
> this *historical* point in time" is a problem
worthy of a
> solving with a microformat.

Absolutely.  A lot more work needs to be done.  To take
Ben's original statement of the problem, somebody asks 
"$50" for an item, but is that US? Canadian?
Australian?

Why not just write:
<abbr title="US Dollars">$</abbr>50
or 
50 <abbr title="US
Dollars">USD</abbr>


If the problem is clarifying what the funny S means, that's
probably enough and no microformat is necessary.  

On the other hand, if we do find that more extensive markup
is useful, I expect that a timestamp will be quite helpful
when it comes to parsing monetary values, especially as
webpages age.  Maybe that's part of the currency format,
maybe it ends up in some higher-level format like hListing.

In any case, now it's here in the archives and we can start
with the simple things.

-ml
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

> Ben's original statement of the problem, somebody asks
> "$50" for an item, but is that US?
Canadian? Australian?
> Why not just write:
> <abbr title="US
Dollars">$</abbr>50
> or
> 50 <abbr title="US
Dollars">USD</abbr>

I'm wondering if a currency sign/symbol is technically an
abbreviation, since the sign/symbol stands for the complete
concept
"dollar". Anyway, it's probably good enough to
go on with; but it's a
nagging thought.

Because there is an ISO standard set of currency codes, I
think it
makes sense to work that into the system; so the first
version would
be out - it uses the converstational version, not the code.
The second
seems a little repetitive; although correct.

So <abbr title="USD">$</abbr> might
be better to specify the meaning
of the dollar sign, but no more meaning is added than that
(we haven't
made it to "fifty US Dollars", just "US
Dollars"). Plus, it only
specifies that the letter USD are associated, not that the
letters are
actually part of a formal specification (does that make
sense? ).

So the reason for a container beyond that is to associate
the unit
with the number and to associate the unit with a standard.
Plus it
allows for further development of the microformat.

So... I think <div class="currency
USD">$50</div> would work as a shorthand.

It defines
a) we're talking about money - ISO standard implied,
b) we're talking about the USD variety,
c) we're talking fifty units of that money,
d) a parser could work out the numbers and the symbol.

Of course you could use ABBR instead of DIV. This shorthand
version
would be parsed much like n/fn in vCard, where certain
assumptions are
made if a specific order hasn't been specified.

-Ben

-- 
--- <http://weblog.200ok.c
om.au/>
--- The future has arrived; it's just not
--- evenly distributed. - William Gibson
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On 20 Jul 2006, at 07:27, Ben Buchanan wrote:
>
> So... I think <div class="currency
USD">$50</div> would work as a  
> shorthand.
>
> It defines
> a) we're talking about money - ISO standard implied,
> b) we're talking about the USD variety,
> c) we're talking fifty units of that money,
> d) a parser could work out the numbers and the symbol.
>
> Of course you could use ABBR instead of DIV.

The problem of having the ‘USD’ inside a class attribute is
that this  
hides the data from humans. I think that for the above
mark-up, the  
USD portion does need to be part of an ABBR/title.
Buuuut of course,  
<abbr class="currency"
title="USD">$50</abbr> is arguably
inaccurate,  
since the title should probably read ‘50 USD’, not just ‘USD’.

At that point it actually makes is clearer to me the fact
that we're  
marking up numbers and units, not just currency. It leads on
to mark- 
up like this:

<span class="number"><abbr
class="unit currency"
title="GBP">£</ 
abbr>50</span>
<span class="number">25<span
class="unit">cm</span></span>

I've left the ‘currency’ class name in addition to ‘unit’.
It felt  
intuitive as I wrote it. Whether any provisional ‘units of  
measurement’ µƒ matching the above should have an
enumeration for  
such values: currency, distance… not sure. Go too far down
that road  
and suddenly you're looking at a µf or specifying
dimensions* instead.

Ben

(* To go entirely off on a tangent, a common way of
describing  
dimensions, built on top of some sort of units µf actually
sounds  
quite useful in my head: Visit IKEA, view a table and click
a button  
to have a block representation of that table imported Google
SketchUp  
or some sort of interior design application… Now perhaps
it's just  
the lack of early morning coffee but that sounds alarmingly
viable  
and certainly makes me feel that a units µf could be a very
useful  
foundation to have)
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On 20 Jul 2006, at 07:27, Ben Buchanan wrote:
>
> So... I think <div class="currency
USD">$50</div> would work as a  
> shorthand.
>
> It defines
> a) we're talking about money - ISO standard implied,
> b) we're talking about the USD variety,
> c) we're talking fifty units of that money,
> d) a parser could work out the numbers and the symbol.
>
> Of course you could use ABBR instead of DIV.

The problem of having the ‘USD’ inside a class attribute is
that this  
hides the data from humans. I think that for the above
mark-up, the  
USD portion does need to be part of an ABBR/title.
Buuuut of course,  
<abbr class="currency"
title="USD">$50</abbr> is arguably
inaccurate,  
since the title should probably read ‘50 USD’, not just ‘USD’.

At that point it actually makes is clearer to me the fact
that we're  
marking up numbers and units, not just currency. It leads on
to mark- 
up like this:

<span class="number"><abbr
class="unit currency"
title="GBP">£</ 
abbr>50</span>
<span class="number">25<span
class="unit">cm</span></span>

I've left the ‘currency’ class name in addition to ‘unit’.
It felt  
intuitive as I wrote it. Whether any provisional ‘units of  
measurement’ µƒ matching the above should have an
enumeration for  
such values: currency, distance… not sure. Go too far down
that road  
and suddenly you're looking at a µf or specifying
dimensions* instead.

Ben

(* To go entirely off on a tangent, a common way of
describing  
dimensions, built on top of some sort of units µf actually
sounds  
quite useful in my head: Visit IKEA, view a table and click
a button  
to have a block representation of that table imported Google
SketchUp  
or some sort of interior design application… Now perhaps
it's just  
the lack of early morning coffee but that sounds alarmingly
viable  
and certainly makes me feel that a units µf could be a very
useful  
foundation to have)
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On 20 Jul 2006, at 07:27, Ben Buchanan wrote:
>
> So... I think <div class="currency
USD">$50</div> would work as a  
> shorthand.
>
> It defines
> a) we're talking about money - ISO standard implied,
> b) we're talking about the USD variety,
> c) we're talking fifty units of that money,
> d) a parser could work out the numbers and the symbol.
>
> Of course you could use ABBR instead of DIV.

The problem of having the ‘USD’ inside a class attribute is
that this  
hides the data from humans. I think that for the above
mark-up, the  
USD portion does need to be part of an ABBR/title.
Buuuut of course,  
<abbr class="currency"
title="USD">$50</abbr> is arguably
inaccurate,  
since the title should probably read ‘50 USD’, not just ‘USD’.

At that point it actually makes is clearer to me the fact
that we're  
marking up numbers and units, not just currency. It leads on
to mark- 
up like this:

<span class="number"><abbr
class="unit currency"
title="GBP">£</ 
abbr>50</span>
<span class="number">25<span
class="unit">cm</span></span>

I've left the ‘currency’ class name in addition to ‘unit’.
It felt  
intuitive as I wrote it. Whether any provisional ‘units of  
measurement’ µƒ matching the above should have an
enumeration for  
such values: currency, distance… not sure. Go too far down
that road  
and suddenly you're looking at a µf or specifying
dimensions* instead.

Ben

(* To go entirely off on a tangent, a common way of
describing  
dimensions, built on top of some sort of units µf actually
sounds  
quite useful in my head: Visit IKEA, view a table and click
a button  
to have a block representation of that table imported Google
SketchUp  
or some sort of interior design application… Now perhaps
it's just  
the lack of early morning coffee but that sounds alarmingly
viable  
and certainly makes me feel that a units µf could be a very
useful  
foundation to have)
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

--- Ben Buchanan <wzqtptl02sneakemail.com> wrote:

> So the reason for a container beyond that is to
associate
> the unit
> with the number and to associate the unit with a
> standard. Plus it
> allows for further development of the microformat.

As I understand the uf principles[1] "further
development
of the microformat" shouldn't be a goal in itself. 
Further
development of some practical solution to some real problem
should be the goal.

> It defines
> a) we're talking about money - ISO standard implied,
> b) we're talking about the USD variety,
> c) we're talking fifty units of that money,
> d) a parser could work out the numbers and the symbol.

OK, that seems clear to me, but why does it matter that we
do this?  What's a parser going to *do* once it understands
numbers and currency symbols?  As others have asked in this
thread, what's the use case?

-ml

[1] http://microformats.org/wiki/microformats#t
he_microformats_principles
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

--- Ben Buchanan <wzqtptl02sneakemail.com> wrote:

> So the reason for a container beyond that is to
associate
> the unit
> with the number and to associate the unit with a
> standard. Plus it
> allows for further development of the microformat.

As I understand the uf principles[1] "further
development
of the microformat" shouldn't be a goal in itself. 
Further
development of some practical solution to some real problem
should be the goal.

> It defines
> a) we're talking about money - ISO standard implied,
> b) we're talking about the USD variety,
> c) we're talking fifty units of that money,
> d) a parser could work out the numbers and the symbol.

OK, that seems clear to me, but why does it matter that we
do this?  What's a parser going to *do* once it understands
numbers and currency symbols?  As others have asked in this
thread, what's the use case?

-ml

[1] http://microformats.org/wiki/microformats#t
he_microformats_principles
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

--- Ben Buchanan <wzqtptl02sneakemail.com> wrote:

> So the reason for a container beyond that is to
associate
> the unit
> with the number and to associate the unit with a
> standard. Plus it
> allows for further development of the microformat.

As I understand the uf principles[1] "further
development
of the microformat" shouldn't be a goal in itself. 
Further
development of some practical solution to some real problem
should be the goal.

> It defines
> a) we're talking about money - ISO standard implied,
> b) we're talking about the USD variety,
> c) we're talking fifty units of that money,
> d) a parser could work out the numbers and the symbol.

OK, that seems clear to me, but why does it matter that we
do this?  What's a parser going to *do* once it understands
numbers and currency symbols?  As others have asked in this
thread, what's the use case?

-ml

[1] http://microformats.org/wiki/microformats#t
he_microformats_principles
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

In message <18232-97248sneakemail.com>, Ben
Buchanan
<wzqtptl02sneakemail.com> writes
>> Ben's original statement of the problem, somebody
asks
>> "$50" for an item, but is that US?
Canadian? Australian?
>> Why not just write:
>> <abbr title="US
Dollars">$</abbr>50
>> or
>> 50 <abbr title="US
Dollars">USD</abbr>
>
>I'm wondering if a currency sign/symbol is technically
an
>abbreviation, since the sign/symbol stands for the
complete concept
>"dollar". Anyway, it's probably good enough
to go on with; but it's a
>nagging thought.

Would you argue with, say:

        "pounds sterling" and "Great
British Pounds" can both be
        abbreviated to "£"

?

>Because there is an ISO standard set of currency codes,
I think it
>makes sense to work that into the system; so the first
version would
>be out - it uses the converstational version, not the
code. The second
>seems a little repetitive; although correct.
>
>So <abbr title="USD">$</abbr>
might be better to specify the meaning
>of the dollar sign, but no more meaning is added than
that (we haven't
>made it to "fifty US Dollars", just
"US Dollars").

Indeed, but in:

        <abbr title="USD">$</abbr>50

the numeric value is still available, to both human and
machine.

I do though, have reservations about torturing the
abbreviation-title
attribute like that; USD is itself an abbreviation, and the
title
should, in full, be "United States Dollars".

Once again, consider the (potential or optional) use of a
screen reader/
aural browser, which pronounces title attributes.

>So... I think <div class="currency
USD">$50</div> would work as a shorthand.

>Of course you could use ABBR instead of DIV.

Like this:

        <abbr class="currency USD"
title="fifty United States
        Dollars">$50</abbr>

?


Further thoughts:

I presume that agents would not be troubled by paragraph
including:

        "<abbr title="US
Dollars">$</abbr>50 or <abbr
title="Canadian
        Dollars">$</abbr>50"

any more than, say:

        "<abbr title="International Business
Machines">IBM</abbr> or
        <abbr title="Idiotic Business
Management">IBM</abbr>"

(though neither is human-friendly).

Where the 'nationality' of the currency needs to be shown
to a human,
'$US 50' is:

                <abbr title="US
Dollars">$US</abbr> 50

but what about '$50 US' ?

Though, again:

                <currency type="US
Dollars">50</currency>

could be styled as:

        $50
or
        USD 50
or
        $US 50
or
        $50 US
or
        50 dollars
or
        50 US dollars

as required.
-- 
Andy Mabbett
                Say "NO!" to compulsory ID
Cards:  <http://www.no2id.net/>

                Free Our Data:  <http://www.freeourd
ata.org.uk>
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

In message <18232-97248sneakemail.com>, Ben
Buchanan
<wzqtptl02sneakemail.com> writes
>> Ben's original statement of the problem, somebody
asks
>> "$50" for an item, but is that US?
Canadian? Australian?
>> Why not just write:
>> <abbr title="US
Dollars">$</abbr>50
>> or
>> 50 <abbr title="US
Dollars">USD</abbr>
>
>I'm wondering if a currency sign/symbol is technically
an
>abbreviation, since the sign/symbol stands for the
complete concept
>"dollar". Anyway, it's probably good enough
to go on with; but it's a
>nagging thought.

Would you argue with, say:

        "pounds sterling" and "Great
British Pounds" can both be
        abbreviated to "£"

?

>Because there is an ISO standard set of currency codes,
I think it
>makes sense to work that into the system; so the first
version would
>be out - it uses the converstational version, not the
code. The second
>seems a little repetitive; although correct.
>
>So <abbr title="USD">$</abbr>
might be better to specify the meaning
>of the dollar sign, but no more meaning is added than
that (we haven't
>made it to "fifty US Dollars", just
"US Dollars").

Indeed, but in:

        <abbr title="USD">$</abbr>50

the numeric value is still available, to both human and
machine.

I do though, have reservations about torturing the
abbreviation-title
attribute like that; USD is itself an abbreviation, and the
title
should, in full, be "United States Dollars".

Once again, consider the (potential or optional) use of a
screen reader/
aural browser, which pronounces title attributes.

>So... I think <div class="currency
USD">$50</div> would work as a shorthand.

>Of course you could use ABBR instead of DIV.

Like this:

        <abbr class="currency USD"
title="fifty United States
        Dollars">$50</abbr>

?


Further thoughts:

I presume that agents would not be troubled by paragraph
including:

        "<abbr title="US
Dollars">$</abbr>50 or <abbr
title="Canadian
        Dollars">$</abbr>50"

any more than, say:

        "<abbr title="International Business
Machines">IBM</abbr> or
        <abbr title="Idiotic Business
Management">IBM</abbr>"

(though neither is human-friendly).

Where the 'nationality' of the currency needs to be shown
to a human,
'$US 50' is:

                <abbr title="US
Dollars">$US</abbr> 50

but what about '$50 US' ?

Though, again:

                <currency type="US
Dollars">50</currency>

could be styled as:

        $50
or
        USD 50
or
        $US 50
or
        $50 US
or
        50 dollars
or
        50 US dollars

as required.
-- 
Andy Mabbett
                Say "NO!" to compulsory ID
Cards:  <http://www.no2id.net/>

                Free Our Data:  <http://www.freeourd
ata.org.uk>
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss