[microformats-discuss] RFC: Thoughts on Video and Audio Microformats

[Dr. Ernie Prabhakar]

Hi Charles,

On Oct 18, 2005, at 11:07 AM, Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote:
>> 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
>> does.
>
> 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.

Yeah, that's probably fair, though at some level its a matter of  
degree, not kind.
> Just out of curiosity, what about non-English languages?  Every one of
> the words used seems to be English-based.

Yes, that's true, but so is HTML .   Programming requires a fixed  
vocabulary; the goal is to ensure that user-visible data can always  
be in any language.  Anything else, frankly, is impossible to manage.

>> 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
> specification.)

To be fair: Tantek pulled a similar trick with the 'compact' element  
in XOXO, so its not entirely without precedent. :-)

-- Ernie P.

------------
Ernest N. Prabhakar, Ph.D. <drernie at opendarwin.org>
Ex-Physicist, Marketing Weenie, and Dilettante Hacker
Probe-Hacker blog: http://www.opendarwin.org/~drernie/