- From: Bruce Lawson <brucel@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 09:07:32 +0100
On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 03:17:07 +0100, Tantek ?elik <tantek at cs.stanford.edu> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 14:51, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage at gmail.com> > wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote: >>> >>> I haven't studied the above yet, but I just wanted to bring up a trial >>> balloon for a possible alternative solution: drop <time> and replace it >>> with a generic solution. >>> >>> There are several use cases for <time>: >>> >>> A. Easier styling of dates and times from CSS. >>> >>> B. A way to mark up the publication date/time for an article (e.g. for >>> conversion to Atom). >>> >>> C. A way to mark up machine-readable times and dates for use in >>> Microformats or microdata. >>> >>> Use cases A and B do not seem to have much traction. I think it's too early to tell whether there is "traction". I wonder whether any of the new semantics (article, nav, section, header etc) have much traction yet, simply because they don't yet have many obvious "consumers" - eg, browsers, crawlers, search engines [as far as we know] aren't making use of them yet. Also, developers are still understandably getting used to the more whizzbang aspects of HTML like canvas, video etc. > >>> Proposal: we dump use cases A and B, and pivot <time> on use case C, >>> changing it to <data> and making it like the <abbr> for >>> machine-readable >>> data, primarily for use by Microformats and HTML's microdata feature. I disagree. Opera has just begun to support <time> in Opera 11.50 (demo http://people.opera.com/miket/2011/5/time.html) [Disclosure: Opera is my employer but I'm speaking for myself here, not representing them]. We're seeing <time> used "In the wild", for example on recipes http://www.jennybristow.com/category/recipes/, reddit http://www.reddit.com/ ("submitted 5 hours ago"), http://smashsummit.com/, the default 2011 WordPress theme http://theme.wordpress.com/themes/twentyeleven/ and consequently many WordPress blogs We also see schema.org encouraging the use of <time> http://schema.org/docs/gs.html#advanced_dates and given the importance of Bing, Yahoo and Google it;s fair to assume that web developers will adopt these patterns. In my opinion, rather than dump <time>, we should consider changing the spec so the schema.org use-cases such as time periods <time itemprop="cookTime" datetime="PT1H30M">1 1/2 hrs</time> and "fuzzy" dates like 2011-11 for November 2011 are acceptable: there have been previous mails to the WG from wikipedia authors, genealogists and those working on museum websites stating that the utility of the current <time> element is diminished because of the requirement for precise dates which isn't always possible for historians. -- Hang loose and stay groovy, Bruce Lawson www.brucelawson.co.uk (personal) www.twitter.com/brucel
Received on Friday, 15 July 2011 01:07:32 UTC