[uf-discuss] Microformat Encoding Thoughts
tjameswhite at yahoo.com
Fri Nov 4 07:00:38 PST 2005
What would the difference and/or implications be of using multiple
classes instead? So, your example
> <h2>Document Authors</h2>
> <li class="author">John Doe 1</li>
> <li class="author-supervisor">John Doe 2</li>
> <li class="author-editor">John Doe 3</li>
<li class="author">John Doe 1</li>
<li class="author supervisor">John Doe 2</li>
<li class="author editor">John Doe 3</li>
This captures the core role of author as well as providing specific
levels of authorship.
Of course, to Tantek's point of keeping things visible, citations
usually have visible clues as to role; i.e.:
"Article." John Doe. Translation by John Doe 2. Publication Name. Date.
John Doe is assumed to be author, John Doe 2 is described as editor.
The mark up would then be something like:
<span class="author">John Doe</span>
<span class="author">Translated by John Doe 2</span>
This is an imperfect example though. I would classify editor and
translator separately -- class="author", class="editor",
class="translator". (Though that still leaves things like author and
co-author, editor and co-editor.) However, your point is valid,
especially when handling types of publications.
A work will have a title, but that doesn't (necessarily) tell us what
kind of work it is. I could mention a book called Stars, but that
doesn't tell you if it is a science reference work, a poem, a sci-fi
novel, etc. I was thinking that the mark up would be something like
<span class="title poem">Stars</span>.
(Typically I think that the context of the reference will inform the
reader as to what type of work it is, but there is no meta data
<a href="http://www.spreadfirefox.com/?q=affiliates&id=12227&t=1">Get Firefox!</a>
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
More information about the microformats-discuss