[uf-discuss] Re: DOM scripting as an alternative to include-pattern?

Michael Leikam leikam at yahoo.com
Sat Jun 3 19:01:29 PDT 2006


My hunch is that if js/dom isn't supported or generates an
error then the parser should ignore this DOM manipultation
step and move on to the XHTML-to-TargetFormat

A well-formed piece of content should remain well-formed
regardless of whether any additions are successful.  We
also shouldn't advocate marking up content as
microformatted which doesn't contain necessary fields (like
dtstart for  hcal).  The inclusion of content outside the
top-level tags should be an enhancement and an elaboration
of already appropriately marked up data.

One of my frustrations with hcal/hcard markup is that on
many of my pages, other parts of the page lend context to
the content which is lost when that content is extracted
and republished in a different context.  For example, on an
"about us" page, the company name doesn't need to be placed
next to every employee's title since it's a company page,
but that's exactly what I want when the person's address is
extracted and added to somebody's address book.  A minimal
vCard is better than nothing, but a more complete one would
be preferable.


--- Steve Robillard <s.robillard at snet.net> wrote:

> Michael,
> >From a purely accessible stand point what happens to the
> redundant data and
> the understandability/utility of the complete data when
> JavaScript is
> disabled, and does not included the redundant data?
> Thanks, 
> Steve 

More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list