Re: Microformats and Firefox 3

Hello everyone.

Great work thus far.. just want to drop my 2cents.

1) I don't think Dimitri's text was very clear on this
aspect in
particular, but I believe it would improve the UXP and still
give
control to the publisher.

Why not mixing the suggestion of dimitry (which seems like a
very
well-thought solution) with the CSS one:

- when the user hovers on the margin-mark, the user-agent
should
'target' to the (root?) element (like what's done with the
#anchor in
urls) and that would allow the publishers to specify the
looks/highlight accordingly. Like:

.vcard:target {
border:1px solid red;
}

or even
.vcard:target .actions{
visibility: visible;
}

(without constraining the publisher to a specific class name
or element)


2) Also, should there be only ONE way of displaying uf
content? or
should the user have an option? I believe the operator's
default way
(toolbar) is also pretty darn good and should not be ignored
or would
it go against/collide with the work Michael has been doing?


Cheers,
André Luís

On 9/5/07, Pelle W <mejllistorkodfabrik.se> wrote:
> Farndon, Tony skrev:
> >> 2. Microformats are in page, and there needs
to be some way
> >> to indicate the microformats are available on
the page that
> >> doesn't offend page authors. How can we
accomplish this?
> >>
> > I second the opinion that this is a design issue
and therefore should be
> > handled by css in some way. This would fit into
the web design paradigm
> > of markup for data, css for design. My slightly
different css approach;
> > create custom css property:value pairs, such as
that of
> > -moz-border-radius.
> If something should add anything it should be added by
a javascript
> which the Firefox people may very well supply. To have
CSS instructing
> Firefox to add something into the HTML-data seems
wrong, it doesn't
> really separate the data and content from the design.
If something
> should instruct anything to add new HTML-data to a
document it has to be
> either the HTML itself or JavaScripts. CSS can be used
to style what's
> added, but should do nothing more than that in my
opinion because it's
> only purpose is to add a deisgn and if it's removed the
page should work
> equally well - only not as beutiful as with the CSS
added.
>
> Let's just have a javascript like the one here below.
If Firefox
> supplies a microformats object by default then all
webpages can rely on
> that in Firefox it can easily be extended to add
support for newer
> microformats like Prototype and other javascript
frameworks today
> extends basic DOM-objects and such. If someone would
like they could
> even code their own implementation of such a solution
which can be used
> in other browsers than Firefox until those browsers
adds support
> themselves either directly or indirectly through
extensions.
>
> <script type="text/javascript">
>     if (typeof microformats.hcard == 'object') {
>         // Add some actions to the page in any way,
like this simple and
> bad way
>         document.write('<a href="#"
>
onclick="microfrmats.hcard.add(this.parentNode);"&
gt;Add to addressbook</a>');
>     }
> </style>
>
> There are probably better arguments for choosing a
solution like this
> over a CSS and/or HTML based solution, I hope someone
more experienced
> than me can tell us some of them.
>
> / Pelle W
> _______________________________________________
> microformats-discuss mailing list
> microformats-discussmicroformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss
>

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

On 9/5/07, André Luís <andr3.ptgmail.com> wrote:
> Hello everyone.
>
> - when the user hovers on the margin-mark, the
user-agent should
> 'target' to the (root?) element (like what's done with
the #anchor in
> urls) and that would allow the publishers to specify
the
> looks/highlight accordingly. Like:
>
> .vcard:target {
> border:1px solid red;
> }
>
> or even
> .vcard:target .actions{
> visibility: visible;
> }
>
> (without constraining the publisher to a specific class
name or element)


I agree with many of the previous sentiments.  Dimitri's
mockups are
an excellent idea and I also think it would be great to
style the uf
targets via CSS :target as suggested by André.  I would
just like to
suggest we keep in mind the way Tails Export displays the
available
microformats on a page.  As opposed to Operator (which is
an
invaluable tool) which uses perhaps too much menu nesting, I
feel the
sidebar is the perfect place to organize this type of
content.
Coupled with Dimitri's margin-marks, we could have a
winner.

Jason

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

Thanks for the comments on the margin-marks concept. I
sincerely
appreciate that.

I really like the idea of allowing additional control over
presentation via pseudo-classes, but I am worried that
:target isn't
quite right, at least if we follow the spec to the letter
(ht
tp://www.w3.org/TR/css3-selectors/#target-pseudo),
specifically
since this pseudo-class is not dynamic and there may or may
not be a
fragment identifier on the microformat.

Can :focus be used somehow instead? This would require an
element to
accept keyboard or mouse focus, though...

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