W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-contacts-coord@w3.org > July to September 2010

Re: contact format coordination - next steps

From: Simon Perreault <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca>
Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2010 12:59:19 -0400
Message-ID: <4C87C0E7.8000605@viagenie.ca>
To: jsmarr@stanfordalumni.org
CC: Joseph Smarr <jsmarr@gmail.com>, Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>, public-contacts-coord@w3.org
(Just trying to reply to the technical points concerning vCard...)

On 2010-09-08 12:12, Joseph Smarr wrote:
> For instance, compare the
> representations of gender in Portable Contacts and the proposed vCard XML:
>     <gender>male</gender>
>     vs. 
>     <sex><integer>1</integer></sex>
> I think it's hard to argue that the first version (PoCo) is far more
> readable and semantically clear. 

more readable: Agreed, but who cares? Users are not going to see this.
more semantically clear: Disagree, the semantics of vCard are very well

Note that we had exactly <gender>male</gender> at the beginning and
gradually changed it to what we have now, for two reasons:

1. It's better to follow standards. In this case, ISO 5218 applies. It
says that the term "sex" is preferred, and defines the applicable
values. Standards are good.

2. Usage of the <integer> element provides two advantages (which are not
related to the sex property in particular, but apply at large):

  - It allows using parameter elements which would be siblings of the
value text-node otherwise, making the parser much simpler.

  - It facilitates extensibility using XML namespaces.

> Similarly, we chose to name the list of mailing address fields
> "addresses" instead of vCard's anachronistic "adr"

Again, why should anyone care about the names of the elements? Users are
not going to see this.

> and we dropped the
> "post-office box" and "extended address" sub-fields, which in practice
> are ill-defined and used by none of the major address book providers
> we're aware of, preferring instead a single "streetAddress" multi-line
> field, which is what almost everyone implements anyway and sticks in the
> third sub-field of adr ("street address").

This is also available in vCard. ADR is for formatted addresses whereas
LABEL is for unformatted addresses.

> vCard does not seem to have added
> many (if any) social networking fields.

Not in vCard *core*. A separate RFC will address this. The draft is here:

NAT64/DNS64 open-source --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
STUN/TURN server        --> http://numb.viagenie.ca
vCard 4.0               --> http://www.vcarddav.org
Received on Wednesday, 8 September 2010 16:59:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:38:00 UTC