Talk:Microformat
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Microformat is part of WikiProject Microformats, which encourages the deployment of microformats in Wikipedia, and documents them in the article space. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. Please do not substitute this template. |
Contents |
[edit] long line of underscores
why don't you use an HR tag, instead of the ong line of underscores in the example?
- I didn't use an <hr /> because I think it would make it more difficult for beginners to understand the example.
- The example is suppose to show the reader how to use Microformats. I didn't want to confuse them with a bunch of extra HTML markup. And decided to just keep things simple. That's why I did all that markup inside a set of <pre> tags... and not a complex layout with <table>'s, <div>'s, etc.
- --Charles Iliya Krempeaux 09:10, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
- And ASCII art on webpages is so much "more aesthetically pleasing". It irradiates that quaint early 80s feeling.
[edit] Singular page title
This page and the singular redirect to it should be swapped. Andy Mabbett 19:16, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
- Done. —Ruud 19:58, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] History
I've removed the following from the article:
- Microformats were anticipated in the original design of HTML. However, early efforts to create semantic links using the rel and rev attributes used a "separate, non-URL, name space and binding mechanism for link types similar to MIME, and this was a lot of overhead. The first proposals that allowed link types to be looked up online, with only a few hardwired defaults, much as plugins work, in early 1995, seemed to be misunderstood, with some HTML-WG participants incapable of differentiating the target from the type. The proposals originating at this time tended to emphasize presentation of the links, and stuck to a few static types that could be implemented in browsers, like "embed".
- As RDF evolved, it became clearer that the original rel and rev approach had merits: it was lower overhead, required no data type definitions or upper ontology.
It's partly uncited (and the citations given are to mailing list posts), overly technical, and seems to contain opinion. Andy Mabbett 19:43, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] class name conflicts
How are class name collisions handled? Where you want to use a microformat class name but not because it's part of the microformat? — Omegatron 03:43, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- The likelihood of someone needing to use, say, "fn" inside a class of "vcard" is slight; but there are profiles which can be included in the head element. Further discussion of this issue is archived via the uFs wiki. Andy Mabbett 09:30, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- Can you link? — Omegatron 13:41, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Sorry - it's scattered all over the place, including the mailing list archives (which are downloadable in Berkeley format) Andy Mabbett 14:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
-
