[uf-discuss] hResume and object-based include

[Ryan King]

On Jun 11, 2006, at 9:19 PM, Tantek Çelik wrote:
> On 6/11/06 6:11 PM, "Steve Ganz" <steve at ganz.name> wrote:
>
>> I think we all agree that using the <address> element is certainly  
>> the most
>> semantically appropriate element to use when marking up a document  
>> author's
>> contact information.
>>
>> The question is whether or not using <address> as the parent  
>> element for the
>> author's hCard is a SHOULD or a MUST in hResume. As Angus  
>> mentions, it poses
>> a problem because the <address> element is an inline element and  
>> thus only
>> accepts inline elements as children.
>
> IMHO a SHOULD, because sometimes using <address> can be a pain due to
> HTML4's annoying (and useless as far as I've ever known) block/inline
> embedding rules.

I agree that using <address> has some funky limitations which make it  
tough use validly. However, it *does* have a semantic I'd like to  
capture.

>> In the hResume draft, it is written:
>>
>> Schema:
>>
>> * contact info. required. <address> + hCard.
>
> How about:
>
> * contact info. required.  MUST use hCard.  SHOULD use <address> +  
> hCard.

In the case where the author is *not* using an <address>, we lose the  
semantic of "this is the hCard for the author of this page". I don't  
think it would be a good idea to make all hCards in an hResume apply  
to the author.

> ?
>
>> Field Details:
>>
>> * contact:: Current contact info. The <address> with hCard.
>
> How about:
>
> * contact:: Current contact info in an hCard. SHOULD use <address> if
> possible.
>
> ?
>
>> Does the above mean an hResume author MUST use the <address>  
>> element to mark
>> up the authors hCard?
>
> It's not clear, nor was that intended by the authors, thus we  
> should clarify
> it.

I agree that its not clear, but I actually intended it to be a MUST.  
Of course, I'm open to that changing, though.

-ryan