[uf-dev] Using class for non-human data

[Jake Archibald]

Any solution which requires CSS, JavaScript, prevents HTML4 / XHTML
validation, or puts machine data in a human readable place isn't
really an option for the BBC (and sites with a similar range of
users).

For me, the great thing about microformats is they don't break
validation and *shouldn't* impact on usability & accessibility.

On 6/23/08, Guillaume Lebleu <guillaume at lebleu.org> wrote:
> Toby A Inkster wrote:
>> Of course the other approach is to say "to hell with validity" and
>> embrace RDFa's "content" attribute, which can be introduced in a very
>> easy and straight-forward manner without using the rest of RDFa
> Having followed the discussions on this matter for some time, it seems
> to me that we are indeed reaching a limit here, in terms of keeping both
> compliant with XHTML semantics and adhering to a (unwritten?) principle
> that microformats should not influence how the human-readable content is
> written in the first place.
>
> For those implementations not willing to say "to hell with validity",
> could they get away with a machine-readable content for dates that gets
> formatted in a human friendly way in JavaScript for display to humans?
>
> For instance, the HTML would be <span class="dstart
> date">2005-10-10T10:10:10-0100</span>, but by way of a "data pretty
> printer" (something like http://ejohn.org/blog/javascript-pretty-date/),
> it would be displayed as "10:10am on October 10th 2005".
>
> Is this a heresy? What do you think?
>
> Guillaume
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> microformats-dev mailing list
> microformats-dev at microformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-dev
>

-- 
Sent from Google Mail for mobile | mobile.google.com