Re: update on vCard edits and The Compromise

Harry Halpin wrote:

...

> 2) The compromise with Garrett is to allow "additional-names" to be an
> ordered list/sequence of some kind, as well as "honorable-prefixes" and
> "honorable-suffixes".

I might be wrong, but I thought Garrett agreed prefixes and suffixes 
aren't ordered? I thought he just wanted to remove the restriction on 
cardinality?

> Therefore, we have 3 places with names can be ordered. This is important
> for Garrett as he is interested in converting vCard to vCard->RDF, and
> preserving order in a machine-processable manner, which is difficult
> with reliance on just "sort-string"

Yes, but I'm still unclear how additional names as ordered is helpful, 
unless you follow the problematic nco convention of treating only the 
first given name as the proper given name and any others as ordered 
additional names.

> I would suggest that the compromise is a proper-superset of Norm's
> proposal, since we should not force the use of sequences/lists where not
> needed, as in:
> 
>     <vcard:honorable-prefixes>             
>          <rdf:seq>
>             <rdf:li>Mr.</rdf:li>
>          </rdf:seq>
>      </vCard:honorable-prefixes>
> 
> should just be:
> 
>     <vcard:honorable-prefixes>             
>             Mr.
>      </vCard:honorable-prefixes>
> 
> but would allow one to mark ordering where important
> 
>     <vcard:honorable-prefixes>             
>          <rdf:seq>
>             <rdf:li>Sir</rdf:li>
>             <rdf:li>Mr.</rdf:li>
>          </rdf:seq>
>      </vCard:honorable-prefixes>
> 
> Does that make sense? 

I was assuming:

<vcard:honorable-prefix>Sir</vcard:honorable-prefix>
<vcard:honorable-prefix>Mr</vcard:honorable-prefix>

Bruce

Received on Thursday, 26 July 2007 13:53:16 UTC