[uf-discuss] First version of Currency proposal
gl at brixlogic.com
Wed Oct 11 14:46:49 PDT 2006
Andy Mabbett wrote:
> How does this relate to the proposal in:
I added an acknowledgment section that links to your strawman proposal.
To answer your question about how it relates to your strawman proposal,
I think it is very close to it:
* It has the same money class name you described
* It has the same amount class name you described with same usage
* It has the date you suggested with the design pattern you suggested
* "symbol" class name omitted with the objective of simplifying the
first version as it was not present in most brainstorming suggestions
* "unit" class name same as the one you described with more details,
as you have read like me, some in the community are discussing the
value of this one, so we may omit it in the first version as well.
* equivalence: your text was questioning whether we needed this, so
for simplicity it was omitted in this first version.
In terms of the issues you mentioned in your strawman proposal:
* I thought that postponing support for currencies that are no
longer officially in use was fair for the purpose of simplifying
the first version.
* For tables, I suggested we reuse the include design pattern. This
allows to markup the typical legend found next to tables "(amount
in $)" and refer to it later. It is more consistent than allowing
the ISO 4217 to be also a class name. I remember from the list
that I am not the only one to argue that "USD" is content, not a
Regarding issues in the mailing list, I can only talk for the issues
that were discussed over the last 2 months, and I believe they were
incorporated, as I followed these discussions very closely. Primarily, I
put aside in the separate thread (measure) everything related to
combinations of money and units, such as in prices.
If you think this proposal is missing some issues that must be
absolutely addressed for the first version, let me know.
More information about the microformats-discuss