- From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 10:49:04 +1000
- To: mark.birbeck@x-port.net
- CC: www-html@w3.org
Mark Birbeck wrote: > I don't see this: > >> > <span datatype="xsd:date" content="2006-08-31">tomorrow</span> > > being difficult, when compared to this: > >> <t datetime="2006-08-31">tomorrow</t> > > But note anyway that the RDFa mechanism used in XHTML 2 is actually > more flexible than is immediately obvious. For example, it can be used > for situations like this: > > The <span content="Tony Blair">Prime Minister</span> will today travel > to... How is that better than simply writing this? The Prime Minister, Tony Blair, will today travel to... > <span datatype="xsd:date">2006-09-06</span> > > And of course, the @datetime approach has to hard code what the format > for a datetime is, which is very prescriptive. The RDFa approach > provides a mechanism that can be used on sites dealing with anything > from astronomy to sports fixtures to shopping-carts to photography, > each area of interest having its own preference for what the format > for a 'date/time' should be. But if every site uses a potentially different date format, how do you expect a UA to understand it? Isn't it better to have a single date format that can be easily parsed and understood by a UA, regardless of what it's being used for? -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.au/
Received on Thursday, 7 September 2006 00:49:32 UTC