- From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 14:27:57 +1000
Lachlan Hunt wrote: > we could introduce the edit and datetime attributes from the XHTML > 2.0 draft's Edit Attributes Module [1]. I just realised that the datetime attribute from the Edit module would clash with the proposed datetime attribute of the <t> element [1]. e.g. What would the datetime attribute mean in this? <t edit="inserted" datetime="2006-08-31">31 Aug 2006</t> It could either mean that the markup was inserted on 2006-08-31 or that the content is a date equivalent to 2006-08-31. A possible solution could be to keep edit and datetime attributes for editing and rename the datetime attribute for the <t> element to something else (e.g. dt) e.g. <t dt="2006-08-31">31 Aug 2006</t> <t dt="2006-08-31" edit="inserted" datetime="2006-09-01T12:30Z">31 Aug 2006</t> The problem with that is that authors may get confused and use datetime instead of dt, or vice versa. Alternatively, we could use the title attribute instead. e.g. <t title="2006-08-31">31 Aug 2006</t> That has the advantage of actually making the ISO date accessible to users using the existing tooltip mechansim and is similar to the current abuse of the <abbr> element for the datetime microformat [2]. [1] http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#the-t [2] http://microformats.org/wiki/datetime-design-pattern -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.au/
Received on Wednesday, 30 August 2006 21:27:57 UTC