"uid" microformats? (was Re: [uf-discuss] ISBN mark-up)
liu_x at lanl.gov
Tue Apr 25 16:00:11 PDT 2006
On Tue, 25 Apr 2006, Tantek Çelik wrote:
>> With URI you got all these things free, and you don't have to argue about
>> persistentence or uniqueness (which are hollow without concrete
>> schema/mechanism), it's much simpler to directly reference URI RFC.
> True. My point is that URL is preferable over URN as well, and thus we
> prefer to say that UIDs SHOULD be URLs, though certainly per your point we
> could say if you cannot use a URL for your UID then you SHOULD at least use
> a URI/URN.
> Or are you proposing that we say that UIDs MUST be URIs in the context of
I would propose to leave UID intact in hcalendar and hcard, because
whatever written in rfc2426/rfc2445 and their examples cannot be
easily changed, and they seem to work well with hcalendar/hcard.
And I suggest a new "URI" microformat for the purpose of "indicating
something *is* an identifier" in general, in this case you can easily
reference URI RFC and no further elaboration about
persistence/resovlable/uniqueness, because these issues are addressed by
various URI specification.
More information about the microformats-discuss