[microformats-discuss] RFC: Thoughts on Video and Audio
Charles Iliya Krempeaux
supercanadian at gmail.com
Tue Oct 18 11:07:43 PDT 2005
On 10/18/05, David Janes -- BlogMatrix <davidjanes at blogmatrix.com> wrote:
> Dr. Ernie Prabhakar wrote:
> > On Oct 17, 2005, at 7:32 PM, Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote:
> >> The "class" attribute and the "title" attribute imply absolutely no
> >> semantics (as far as I know).
> > Um, not quite. Let me try to explain, though Tantek or Ryan could
> > probably do better. First of all, you *are* correct in that the
> > preferred method is to reuse *existing* HTML semantics; the URN trick
> > is rather clever, I must admit.
> To build on this a little, the "class" and "title" attributes do not
> imply semantics or meaning any more than any other string of characters
I don't think that is completely correct. I think the "rel" and "rev"
attributes imply more semantics than "class" and "title" do.
Usage of "class" and "title" COULD imply semantics. But usage of
"rel" and "rev" MUST imply semantics.
> The microformats community/process/standards *defines* certain
> "class"es and "title"s to have meaning in certain contexts.
> As Ernie implies elsewhere, the semantic meaning should be fairly clear
> because the tendency is to pick names that have real meaning, either
> from existing standards or from real live usage on the web.
Just out of curiosity, what about non-English languages? Every one of
the words used seems to be English-based.
> As mentioned in my previous message, "urn" will not work unless you're
> willing to sacrifice XHTML/HTML 4.01 compliance.
Yes, I agree. (I should have confirmed that the "urn" attribute was
still available for the HTML anchor element, by looking at the actual
Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.
charles @ reptile.ca
supercanadian @ gmail.com
developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/
Never forget where you came from
More information about the microformats-discuss