W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > July 2007

Re: microformats, profiles, and taking back rel/class names [standardizedFieldValues-51]

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 13:08:48 -0400
Message-ID: <e9dffd640707171008o46aa0182s17486f692c981b93@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Harry Halpin" <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
Cc: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com, "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, www-tag <www-tag@w3.org>

On 7/16/07, Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org> wrote:
> > If you really want these names grounded in URI space, I think the only
> > way forward is to bypass these legacy issues by starting from scratch
> > with new attributes.
>
> Then why not keep the old ones, i.e. @profile and @rel? What would "new"
> attributes do? A rose by any other name would be just as sweet - so why
> not call it a "rose" as opposed to an "emerose"? Making up new attributes
> seems like it would lead to confusion and be even less acceptable to the
> HTML WG. Could you explicate what you mean by "new attributes"?

Something like this;

<div class2="http://example.org/human-resources/employee">

or

<div class2="employee" profile2="http://example.org/human-resources/">

Mark.
-- 
Mark Baker.  Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.         http://www.markbaker.ca
Coactus; Web-inspired integration strategies  http://www.coactus.com
Received on Tuesday, 17 July 2007 17:08:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:46 GMT