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 straight in
with ideas for
> alternative mark-up, ways of kludging the existing
practice into
> different elements or attributes. Follow the process.
We need to
> fully define the problem: We need a list of which
microformat
> properties _require_ the facility for precise
representations. They
> don't all need it
I think we should follow Ben's suggestion here. We've
already drifted
into discussing solutions that are completely irrelevant to
the actual
problems we're seeking to solve (last I checked, there were
no month-
long songs in the hAudio examples). It seems to me
"3:23" is already
machine-readable, so I think we made a mistake in looking
for an
alternate machine-readable way to represent that. Rather
than trying
to fit it into the full complexity of ISO 8601, much of
which is far
outside the scope of this specific problem, I suggest we
simply define
the trivial process for reading a duration in that commonly
published
format. We may not be able to remove the need for the
<abbr> pattern
altogether, but identifying which properties actually
require
alternate machine-readable representations will at least
help focus
potential solutions.
Peace,
Scott
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss
|
