W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > November 2011

Re: noted 3 issues re: time/data (was Re: minutes for HTML WG f2f, 2011-11-04, part 1)

From: Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com <mtanalin@yandex.ru>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 22:40:40 +0400
To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: (wrong string) Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, public-html@w3.org
Message-Id: <196271321555240@web104.yandex.ru>

17.11.2011, 22:34, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>:
> 2011/11/17 Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com <mtanalin@yandex.ru>:
>> š17.11.2011, 22:15, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>:
>>> šHm, you don't seem to understand my response. šA Microdata property
>>> šcan have *another Microdata item* as its value. šFor example, a
>>> š"review" microdata vocab that uses a "geo" vocab for its location
>>> šproperty. šThat's indicated by putting @itemprop and @itemscope on the
>>> šsame element.
>> šIt would probably be useful if you provide a concrete descriptive example showing how DATA element resolve this situation elegant and nonconfusing way. Thanks.
> I... don't understand. šWhat situation?

Situation that you describe as quite abstract example of why @itemscope and @itempropvalue would be confusing. Then it's logical for you to provide a _concrete_ markup (HTML code) example where DATA element is nonconfusing for marking up same data ('geo', etc.).
Received on Thursday, 17 November 2011 18:41:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:28 UTC