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

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

From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 13:20:08 -0400
Message-ID: <469CFA48.6030501@ibiblio.org>
To: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Cc: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, www-tag <www-tag@w3.org>

Why not instead of

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

just do

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

Or, at least keep the option of @profile in the header so one doesn't
have to write @profiles for every div element.


Mark.
Mark Baker wrote:
> 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.


-- 
		-harry

Harry Halpin,  University of Edinburgh 
http://www.ibiblio.org/hhalpin 6B522426
Received on Tuesday, 17 July 2007 17:20:20 GMT

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