From microformats at kaply.com Wed Nov 7 07:32:28 2007 From: microformats at kaply.com (Mike Kaply) Date: Wed Nov 7 07:32:35 2007 Subject: [uf-dev] Displaying hidden microformat in Operator (and elsewhere) Message-ID: In looking at pages like: http://www.samsoniteblacklabel.com/store-locator.samsonite I've discovered what I consider a flaw in Operator in that I display all microformats even if they aren't visible on the screen at the same time. This can make pages like this one unwieldy. Originally I considered updating Operator to fix this, but on further investigation, I would like to make the core Microformats code I am putting into Firefox ignore hidden microformats. I'd like to know what people think about this. I will only ignore completely hidden microformats, not parts that are hidden. Thanks Mike Kaply From brian.suda at gmail.com Wed Nov 7 07:45:21 2007 From: brian.suda at gmail.com (Brian Suda) Date: Wed Nov 7 07:45:25 2007 Subject: [uf-dev] Displaying hidden microformat in Operator (and elsewhere) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <21e770780711070745ucc315d0yb1c738eb06ff2c90@mail.gmail.com> 2007/11/7, Mike Kaply : > Originally I considered updating Operator to fix this, but on further > investigation, I would like to make the core Microformats code I am > putting into Firefox ignore hidden microformats. --- well, what defines "hidden", is this hidden by JS, taken away from the DOM at load time? or hidden with CSS, or hidden at load-time, but displayed later? I looked at the source of that page, and it has all the stores in the source and it looks like JS is hidding all of them. Then based on your clicks it shows only a sub-set of the vcards. So would Operator would re-look-up all microformats if the DOM changes? and only show/hide the information in the DOM? > I'd like to know what people think about this. --- I think this is not a bad idea, but we need to see what the user-expectation would be? if they run this page through X2V, then you would get 100+ vCards, but with Operator you would only see the few that you can see on the screen. I think this is OK, because the average user would probably not understand where Operator is getting the 100+ hCards when they only see 4 on the page. -brian -- brian suda http://suda.co.uk From bhawkeslewis at googlemail.com Wed Nov 7 07:51:49 2007 From: bhawkeslewis at googlemail.com (Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis) Date: Wed Nov 7 07:52:04 2007 Subject: [uf-dev] Displaying hidden microformat in Operator (and elsewhere) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4731DF15.3080102@googlemail.com> I think there needs to be distinction drawn between what microformatted data prioritised for communication to the user and microformatted data available when queried. 1. The concept of "visible on the screen" is problematic when it comes to accessing content in Firefox via assistive technology like a screen reader. 2. If you want to extract all contacts or citations or whatever from a document, you want all of them not just the visible ones. Does that make sense? -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis Mike Kaply wrote: > In looking at pages like: > > http://www.samsoniteblacklabel.com/store-locator.samsonite > > I've discovered what I consider a flaw in Operator in that I display > all microformats even if they aren't visible on the screen at the same > time. This can make pages like this one unwieldy. > > Originally I considered updating Operator to fix this, but on further > investigation, I would like to make the core Microformats code I am > putting into Firefox ignore hidden microformats. > > I'd like to know what people think about this. > > I will only ignore completely hidden microformats, not parts that are hidden. > > Thanks > > Mike Kaply > _______________________________________________ > microformats-dev mailing list > microformats-dev@microformats.org > http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-dev > From msporny at digitalbazaar.com Wed Nov 7 08:03:32 2007 From: msporny at digitalbazaar.com (Manu Sporny) Date: Wed Nov 7 08:04:48 2007 Subject: [uf-dev] Displaying hidden microformat in Operator (and elsewhere) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4731E1D4.7080206@digitalbazaar.com> Mike Kaply wrote: > In looking at pages like: > > http://www.samsoniteblacklabel.com/store-locator.samsonite > > I've discovered what I consider a flaw in Operator in that I display > all microformats even if they aren't visible on the screen at the same > time. This can make pages like this one unwieldy. > > Originally I considered updating Operator to fix this, but on further > investigation, I would like to make the core Microformats code I am > putting into Firefox ignore hidden microformats. Do both, give users the option but default it to not showing hidden Microformats :) Operator is primarily a tool to help people glean information from web pages. They won't understand if 100 vCards pop up in Operator when only 5 are visible on the screen. Advanced users, however, may want every vCard on the page displayed to them, thus they should have that option. This, I believe, is more of a usability question than anything else. If it is a usability question, we should strive for the following: * Keep what is visible on screen and what is visible via Microformats in sync. * Allow lower-level APIs to get access to all of the Microformats on the page if they need to. * Don't overload the person browsing with unnecessary data. * Give them the option of seeing "hidden" Microformats. -- manu From martin at malditainternet.com Wed Nov 7 08:06:04 2007 From: martin at malditainternet.com (Martin Sarsale) Date: Wed Nov 7 08:06:09 2007 Subject: [uf-dev] Displaying hidden microformat in Operator (and elsewhere) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/7/07, Mike Kaply wrote: > In looking at pages like: > > http://www.samsoniteblacklabel.com/store-locator.samsonite > > I've discovered what I consider a flaw in Operator in that I display > all microformats even if they aren't visible on the screen at the same > time. This can make pages like this one unwieldy. > > Originally I considered updating Operator to fix this, but on further > investigation, I would like to make the core Microformats code I am > putting into Firefox ignore hidden microformats. > > I'd like to know what people think about this. > > I will only ignore completely hidden microformats, not parts that are hidden. IMHO it's a similar problem with screen readers and image replacement techniques. ( http://www.alistapart.com/articles/fir/ ) Maybe you could ignore display:none microformats but do show visibility:hidden? I can think of some cases where you might want to replace the microformat info for an image, for example. Let's try not to repeat old errors (ignoring display:none and visibility:hidden data as screen readers do). Since I see firefox setting the standards for microformat developing, I would try to raise the bar as high as possible. From ed.ncbi at gmail.com Wed Nov 7 08:07:57 2007 From: ed.ncbi at gmail.com (ed ncbi) Date: Wed Nov 7 08:08:01 2007 Subject: [uf-dev] Displaying hidden microformat in Operator (and elsewhere) In-Reply-To: <4731DF15.3080102@googlemail.com> References: <4731DF15.3080102@googlemail.com> Message-ID: <1c69ccdc0711070807y4cec8b65hec1056f648b7f4c6@mail.gmail.com> I agree with Brian that there should be a well defined description of what is considered "hidden." Why not have it both ways? A little checkbox (or preference... whatever) for "hide non-visible" with an attached filter would be far more useful than removing the chance to see all results. Down the line, an editable filter system (maybe like adblock?) would allow people to confine their results to what they are specifically looking for. -e On 11/7/07, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote: > > I think there needs to be distinction drawn between what microformatted > data prioritised for communication to the user and microformatted data > available when queried. > > 1. The concept of "visible on the screen" is problematic when it comes > to accessing content in Firefox via assistive technology like a screen > reader. > > 2. If you want to extract all contacts or citations or whatever from a > document, you want all of them not just the visible ones. > > Does that make sense? > > -- > Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis > > Mike Kaply wrote: > > In looking at pages like: > > > > http://www.samsoniteblacklabel.com/store-locator.samsonite > > > > I've discovered what I consider a flaw in Operator in that I display > > all microformats even if they aren't visible on the screen at the same > > time. This can make pages like this one unwieldy. > > > > Originally I considered updating Operator to fix this, but on further > > investigation, I would like to make the core Microformats code I am > > putting into Firefox ignore hidden microformats. > > > > I'd like to know what people think about this. > > > > I will only ignore completely hidden microformats, not parts that are > hidden. > > > > Thanks > > > > Mike Kaply > > _______________________________________________ > > microformats-dev mailing list > > microformats-dev@microformats.org > > http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > microformats-dev mailing list > microformats-dev@microformats.org > http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-dev > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-dev/attachments/20071107/d6a7a63f/attachment.html From mejllistor at kodfabrik.se Wed Nov 7 08:16:55 2007 From: mejllistor at kodfabrik.se (Pelle W) Date: Wed Nov 7 08:17:13 2007 Subject: [uf-dev] Displaying hidden microformat in Operator (and elsewhere) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4731E4F7.4060202@kodfabrik.se> Mike Kaply skrev: > I've discovered what I consider a flaw in Operator in that I display > all microformats even if they aren't visible on the screen at the same > time. This can make pages like this one unwieldy. > > Originally I considered updating Operator to fix this, but on further > investigation, I would like to make the core Microformats code I am > putting into Firefox ignore hidden microformats. > > I'd like to know what people think about this. > I have no knowledge in what should be done according to standards so this might sound insane but my personal opinion is that the microformats should be processed if they are present in the document and hidden with CSS because there may be perfectly legal reasons for hiding them and if such data isn't included it could perhaps present designers with a tough choice between design and semantics. For example - I may want to replace an microformat with an image showing that very same data but with pixels instead of text. Should I then not have the possibility of having semantic data being processed by Firefox because I don't want to duplicate the info already present in the image? The only time it would be a problem for Firefox to process hidden data would be when a JavaScript-enabled page stores an excessive amount of data within the DOM-tree and it should be that page's resonsibility to have the DOM-tree only containing the data present at the moment. It is certainly possible to remove it from the DOM-tree and add it first when it's actually used on the site. Content and presentation should be separated when designing a website - right? The html-document only containing the data of that page and the css containing how it should be presented? Microformats is tied to the former - the data - and not to the presentation in my opinion. The only concern when it comes to microformats should be about the data contained within the document and it is the content's creator's responsibility to have the document only containing that very page's own data and if that is done responsible then it wouldn't be a problem for tools to only consider the availability of the microformat and not it's presentation. I would say that such a flaw is a flaw in the page rather than in Operator. / Pelle From paul_wilkins at xtra.co.nz Wed Nov 7 14:45:42 2007 From: paul_wilkins at xtra.co.nz (paul_wilkins@xtra.co.nz) Date: Wed Nov 7 14:45:47 2007 Subject: [uf-dev] Displaying hidden microformat in Operator (and elsewhere) Message-ID: <279442.68925.qm@web96011.mail.aue.yahoo.com> From: Martin Sarsale > IMHO it's a similar problem with screen readers and image replacement > techniques. ( > http://www.alistapart.com/articles/fir/ ) 456 Bera Street deals with the issue in todays article http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200711/screen_readers_sometimes_ignore_displaynone/ The simple workaround [. . .] is to use both display:none and visibility:hidden: .hidden { display:none; visibility:hidden; } -- Paul Wilkins From martin at malditainternet.com Wed Nov 7 15:28:42 2007 From: martin at malditainternet.com (Martin Sarsale) Date: Wed Nov 7 15:28:47 2007 Subject: [uf-dev] Displaying hidden microformat in Operator (and elsewhere) In-Reply-To: <279442.68925.qm@web96011.mail.aue.yahoo.com> References: <279442.68925.qm@web96011.mail.aue.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Nov 7, 2007 7:45 PM, wrote: > From: Martin Sarsale > > IMHO it's a similar problem with screen readers and image replacement > > techniques. ( > > http://www.alistapart.com/articles/fir/ ) > > 456 Bera Street deals with the issue in todays article > http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200711/screen_readers_sometimes_ignore_displaynone/ > > > The simple workaround [. . .] is to use both display:none and visibility:hidden: ok, that's the easy case, when you DON'T want content to be read/displayed. now, the other case is the difficult one: "how do you do to style content that is related to the current document but you don't want it to be displayed raw" (maybe replaced by a image). In that case, visibility:hidden makes a lot of sense. AFAIK that is a "problem" of screen readers, they represent the interest of a minority (handicapped people) and they try to do their best to make inaccessible websites accessible. The "right" way to do this, is to create stylesheets for screen and speech @media types (see http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/media.html#media-types). Screen Readers shouldn't be messing with styles designed to for visual screens! If screen readers were using the correct stylesheet ("speech") display would be the only rule they have to obey http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visuren.html#display-prop (visibility is only for visual media types!) Now, since Microformats are a "new thing" and Mike with his (great) Operator is setting the 'standard' (since, AFAIK, with FF3 it will be the first massive product supporting MF) I would like it to be done "right": "display:none" is ignored, "visibility:hidden" is shown in Operator. Guys that forgot that HTML was designed to markup documents and are creating applications with it ( 99%of us ;) ) will learn that when you want to "show some microformat which was hidden before" you have to set "display:block" AND "visibility:visible". From tjameswhite at yahoo.com Wed Nov 7 17:32:47 2007 From: tjameswhite at yahoo.com (Tim White) Date: Wed Nov 7 17:32:49 2007 Subject: [uf-dev] Displaying hidden microformat in Operator (and elsewhere) Message-ID: <147248.39196.qm@web30811.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Mike Kaply wrote: >I'd like to know what people think about this. > >I will only ignore completely hidden microformats, not parts that are >hidden. I like this solution, along with, as others have suggested, an option in Operator to "show all". ~ Tim tjameswhite.com'>http://www.tjameswhite.com">tjameswhite.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From mdagn at spraci.com Fri Nov 9 03:40:55 2007 From: mdagn at spraci.com (Michael MD) Date: Fri Nov 9 03:40:59 2007 Subject: [uf-dev] Displaying hidden microformat in Operator (and elsewhere) References: <4731E4F7.4060202@kodfabrik.se> Message-ID: <00f901c822c5$64ec7960$116bacca@COMCEN> >> I've discovered what I consider a flaw in Operator in that I display >> all microformats even if they aren't visible on the screen at the same >> time. This can make pages like this one unwieldy. >> >> Originally I considered updating Operator to fix this, but on further >> investigation, I would like to make the core Microformats code I am >> putting into Firefox ignore hidden microformats. >> >> I'd like to know what people think about this. If there are hidden microformats in a page wouldn't it be best to at least make it known that something is there and give the user a choice to look at it? Most aggregators and other server-side tools won't see css or javascript (and because of the extra resources required are unlikely to do so any time soon) so if someone is using Operator or a future Firefox release to check content they intend to be seen by non-browser-based tools they might want to be able to see everything that is marked up. From lists at allinthehead.com Fri Nov 23 06:44:17 2007 From: lists at allinthehead.com (Drew McLellan) Date: Fri Nov 23 06:47:38 2007 Subject: [uf-dev] Displaying hidden microformat in Operator (and elsewhere) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7093C050-3CCF-4D79-B844-85707DA86F34@allinthehead.com> On 7 Nov 2007, at 15:32, Mike Kaply wrote: > In looking at pages like: > > http://www.samsoniteblacklabel.com/store-locator.samsonite > > I've discovered what I consider a flaw in Operator in that I display > all microformats even if they aren't visible on the screen at the same > time. This can make pages like this one unwieldy. > > Originally I considered updating Operator to fix this, but on further > investigation, I would like to make the core Microformats code I am > putting into Firefox ignore hidden microformats. > > I'd like to know what people think about this. > > I will only ignore completely hidden microformats, not parts that > are hidden. Putting aside the issue of how you detect whether something is visible on screen or not (an unenviable task), could you consider segmenting the menu somehow? Perhaps put all the invisible items into a submenu at the bottom of the list. The result would be that the user would be presented with a short list of the viewable items, with an easy method of accessing the list of hidden items, but without the need for yet another preference setting. drew. From mailinglist at das-medienkombinat.de Tue Nov 27 01:51:17 2007 From: mailinglist at das-medienkombinat.de (Tim Neugebauer) Date: Tue Nov 27 01:51:49 2007 Subject: [uf-dev] troubles with vcard Message-ID: <200711270951.lAR9pjQx022123@microformats.org> dear mailinglist ;-), my name is tim. i am a german frontend webdeveloper and I like the idea of microformats. I am currently experiencing some problems while trying to build a correct vcard. all basic stuff (name, address, phone,.) works fine and I am able to import this information into ms outlook vcard format via firefox operator extension, but I am not able to import the url of this card. it is marked up as www.unternehmensname.de, which I think is the correct way to do this. but it does not work. as i found out, that there is also no possibility for me to import an url via operator from the official microformat wiki, I want to ask if this case is a know issue or if I did something wrong? my current full vcard looks something like that:
Unternehmensname
Adresse: Work
Am Muster 1
00000 Musterstadt
Tel.: Work0123 - 213 000
Fax.: Fax0123 - 213 010
E-Mail:
Web: www. unternehmensname.de
Ansprechpartner: Max Mustermann
kind regards tim -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-dev/attachments/20071127/a52539b3/attachment-0001.html From Artem at Chertov.name Tue Nov 27 02:13:47 2007 From: Artem at Chertov.name (Artem Chertov) Date: Tue Nov 27 02:13:50 2007 Subject: [uf-dev] troubles with vcard In-Reply-To: <200711270951.lAR9pjQx022123@microformats.org> References: <200711270951.lAR9pjQx022123@microformats.org> Message-ID: Hello, Tim. For right display url address in MS Outlook you may use:
Web: unternehmensname.de
2007/11/27, Tim Neugebauer : > > dear mailinglist ;-), > > > > my name is tim. i am a german frontend webdeveloper and I like the idea of > microformats. > > > > I am currently experiencing some problems while trying to build a correct > vcard. all basic stuff (name, address, phone,?) works fine and I am able to > import this information into ms outlook vcard format via firefox operator > extension, but I am not able to import the url of this card. it is marked up > as www.unternehmensname.de, which I think is the > correct way to do this. but it does not work. > > > > as i found out, that there is also no possibility for me to import an url > via operator from the official microformat wiki, I want to ask if this case > is a know issue or if I did something wrong? > > > > my current full vcard looks something like that: > > > > *
> * > > * class="org">Unternehmensname* > > *
class="adr">Adresse:* > > * > Work* > > * >
Am Muster 1
* > > * > 00000* > > * > Musterstadt* > > *
* > > *
class="tel">Tel.:* > > * > Work0123 - 213 > 000* > > *
* > > *
class="tel">Fax.:* > > * > Fax0123 - 213 > 010* > > *
* > > *
E-Mail: * > > * > * > > *
* > > *
Web: * > > * ** class="url">www. unternehmensname.de* > > * **
* > > * >
Ansprechpartner:* > > * > Max Mustermann* > > *
* > > *
* > > > > kind regards tim > > > > _______________________________________________ > microformats-dev mailing list > microformats-dev@microformats.org > http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-dev > > -- ? ?????????, ????? ?????? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-dev/attachments/20071127/698a130b/attachment.html From pmw57 at xtra.co.nz Tue Nov 27 03:01:37 2007 From: pmw57 at xtra.co.nz (Paul Wilkins) Date: Tue Nov 27 03:01:39 2007 Subject: [uf-dev] troubles with vcard In-Reply-To: References: <200711270951.lAR9pjQx022123@microformats.org> Message-ID: <18050cf90711270301k2c4ad6ferbad427b2cabee30f@mail.gmail.com> On Nov 27, 2007 11:13 PM, Artem Chertov wrote: > Hello, Tim. > > For right display url address in MS Outlook you may use: > >
Web: > unternehmensname.de >
I would have thought that putting the class on the link itself would be easier. -- Paul Wilkins From Artem at Chertov.name Tue Nov 27 03:36:11 2007 From: Artem at Chertov.name (Artem Chertov) Date: Tue Nov 27 03:36:15 2007 Subject: [uf-dev] troubles with vcard In-Reply-To: <18050cf90711270301k2c4ad6ferbad427b2cabee30f@mail.gmail.com> References: <200711270951.lAR9pjQx022123@microformats.org> <18050cf90711270301k2c4ad6ferbad427b2cabee30f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Ofcource, but MS Outlook, does not display content in first url class. With Operator we can see debug of it:
http://url2.com/
object url { 0=http://url2.com/ 1=http://url1.com/ } Outlook card in "Home page" will display http://url1.com/ 2007/11/27, Paul Wilkins : > > On Nov 27, 2007 11:13 PM, Artem Chertov wrote: > > Hello, Tim. > > > > For right display url address in MS Outlook you may use: > > > >
Web: > > unternehmensname.de > >
> > I would have thought that putting the class on the link itself would be > easier. > > > -- > Paul Wilkins > _______________________________________________ > microformats-dev mailing list > microformats-dev@microformats.org > http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-dev > -- ? ?????????, ????? ?????? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-dev/attachments/20071127/ab7dd819/attachment-0001.html From lists at ben-ward.co.uk Tue Nov 27 03:45:16 2007 From: lists at ben-ward.co.uk (Ben Ward) Date: Tue Nov 27 03:45:19 2007 Subject: [uf-dev] troubles with vcard In-Reply-To: <200711270951.lAR9pjQx022123@microformats.org> References: <200711270951.lAR9pjQx022123@microformats.org> Message-ID: <2D33C0B0-7B4B-4ADE-BD59-5BBF4E48F7DC@ben-ward.co.uk> On 27 Nov 2007, at 09:51, Tim Neugebauer wrote: > it is marked up > as www.unternehmensname.de, which I think > is the > correct way to do this. but it does not work. A quick bit of guesswork here as that should parse, but the URL itself isn't valid. Try putting ?http://www.unternehmensname.de? and see if a parser picks it up instead? Operator certainly checks the validity of date timestamps, so checking for well formed URLs would be logical. Ben From brian.suda at gmail.com Tue Nov 27 03:57:13 2007 From: brian.suda at gmail.com (Brian Suda) Date: Tue Nov 27 03:57:17 2007 Subject: [uf-dev] troubles with vcard In-Reply-To: <2D33C0B0-7B4B-4ADE-BD59-5BBF4E48F7DC@ben-ward.co.uk> References: <200711270951.lAR9pjQx022123@microformats.org> <2D33C0B0-7B4B-4ADE-BD59-5BBF4E48F7DC@ben-ward.co.uk> Message-ID: <21e770780711270357v35609358hddb00352592e45a3@mail.gmail.com> 2007/11/27, Ben Ward : > On 27 Nov 2007, at 09:51, Tim Neugebauer wrote: > > it is marked up > > as www.unternehmensname.de, which I think > > is the > > correct way to do this. but it does not work. --- there is a page of known issues and various applications: http://microformats.org/wiki/vcard-implementations Please add anything that you may discover. Is there a URL so others can easily test this, then we can determine if this is a parser issue (and stay on the dev list) or a mark-up issue (and we can move this to the discuss list) thanks, -brian -- brian suda http://suda.co.uk From mailinglist at das-medienkombinat.de Tue Nov 27 04:43:51 2007 From: mailinglist at das-medienkombinat.de (Tim Neugebauer) Date: Tue Nov 27 04:44:23 2007 Subject: Re Re Re: [uf-dev] troubles with vcard In-Reply-To: <200711271136.lARBaJ7o022075@microformats.org> Message-ID: <200711271244.lARCiKhK009486@microformats.org> thanks, this way it works well:
Web: unternehmensname.de
kind regards tim. -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- Von: microformats-dev-bounces@microformats.org [mailto:microformats-dev-bounces@microformats.org] Im Auftrag von microformats-dev-request@microformats.org Gesendet: Dienstag, 27. November 2007 12:36 An: microformats-dev@microformats.org Betreff: microformats-dev Digest, Vol 29, Issue 3 Send microformats-dev mailing list submissions to microformats-dev@microformats.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-dev or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to microformats-dev-request@microformats.org You can reach the person managing the list at microformats-dev-owner@microformats.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of microformats-dev digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: troubles with vcard (Artem Chertov) 2. Re: troubles with vcard (Paul Wilkins) 3. Re: troubles with vcard (Artem Chertov) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 12:13:47 +0200 From: "Artem Chertov" Subject: Re: [uf-dev] troubles with vcard To: "A list for people developing tools with microformats." Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-2022-jp" Hello, Tim. For right display url address in MS Outlook you may use:
Web: unternehmensname.de
2007/11/27, Tim Neugebauer : > > dear mailinglist ;-), > > > > my name is tim. i am a german frontend webdeveloper and I like the idea of > microformats. > > > > I am currently experiencing some problems while trying to build a correct > vcard. all basic stuff (name, address, phone,…) works fine and I am able to > import this information into ms outlook vcard format via firefox operator > extension, but I am not able to import the url of this card. it is marked up > as www.unternehmensname.de, which I think is the > correct way to do this. but it does not work. > > > > as i found out, that there is also no possibility for me to import an url > via operator from the official microformat wiki, I want to ask if this case > is a know issue or if I did something wrong? > > > > my current full vcard looks something like that: > > > > *
> * > > * class="org">Unternehmensname* > > *
class="adr">Adresse:* > > * > Work* > > * >
Am Muster 1
* > > * > 00000* > > * > Musterstadt* > > *
* > > *
class="tel">Tel.:* > > * > Work0123 - 213 > 000* > > *
* > > *
class="tel">Fax.:* > > * > Fax0123 - 213 > 010* > > *
* > > *
E-Mail: * > > * > * > > *
* > > *
Web: * > > * ** class="url">www. unternehmensname.de* > > * **
* > > * >
Ansprechpartner:* > > * > Max Mustermann* > > *
* > > *
* > > > > kind regards tim > > > > _______________________________________________ > microformats-dev mailing list > microformats-dev@microformats.org > http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-dev > > -- С уважением, Артём Чертов -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-dev/attachments/20071127/6 98a130b/attachment-0001.html ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:01:37 +1300 From: "Paul Wilkins" Subject: Re: [uf-dev] troubles with vcard To: "A list for people developing tools with microformats." Message-ID: <18050cf90711270301k2c4ad6ferbad427b2cabee30f@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Nov 27, 2007 11:13 PM, Artem Chertov wrote: > Hello, Tim. > > For right display url address in MS Outlook you may use: > >
Web: > unternehmensname.de >
I would have thought that putting the class on the link itself would be easier. -- Paul Wilkins ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:36:11 +0200 From: "Artem Chertov" Subject: Re: [uf-dev] troubles with vcard To: paul_wilkins@xtra.co.nz, "A list for people developing tools with microformats." Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="koi8-r" Ofcource, but MS Outlook, does not display content in first url class. With Operator we can see debug of it:
http://url2.com/
object url { 0=http://url2.com/ 1=http://url1.com/ } Outlook card in "Home page" will display http://url1.com/ 2007/11/27, Paul Wilkins : > > On Nov 27, 2007 11:13 PM, Artem Chertov wrote: > > Hello, Tim. > > > > For right display url address in MS Outlook you may use: > > > >
Web: > > unternehmensname.de > >
> > I would have thought that putting the class on the link itself would be > easier. > > > -- > Paul Wilkins > _______________________________________________ > microformats-dev mailing list > microformats-dev@microformats.org > http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-dev > -- s UWAVENIEM, aRT#M ~ERTOW -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-dev/attachments/20071127/a b7dd819/attachment.html ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ microformats-dev mailing list microformats-dev@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-dev End of microformats-dev Digest, Vol 29, Issue 3 ***********************************************