- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 16:41:01 -0500
- To: RDF in XHTML task force <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
FYI... "A week or so ago, I started working with the X2V code, which works great but has a lot of redundancy. In order to have some confidence that I wouldn't break it, I developed a test case for each piece of the code that I touched. ..." hcardTest materials, XHTML version of RFC2426, and fun with microformats http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-dev/2005-July/000010.html One of the reasons I started hacking on xhtml2vcard.xsl was to adapt it to produce RDF output. I haven't done that yet. But once that's done, all we'd need is an XMDP profile for hCard, which the microformats folks seem to agree is in order... [[ Would it be more in the spirit of HTML to define these classes in a metadata profile (http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/global.html#h-7.4.4.3), so that "User agents may... perform some activity based on known conventions for that profile"? Should this be a part of microformats specifications in general? (If not, why not?) * ACCEPTED. Yes, all microformats that introduce new classnames SHOULD include an XMDP (http://gmpg.org/xmdp/) profile (which itself is a microformat for defining HTML metadata profiles) that defines those classnames. ]] -- http://microformats.org/wiki/hcalendar-issues -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Monday, 25 July 2005 21:41:13 UTC