title attribute andabbreviatedclassnames(Was:[uf-discuss]Currency Quickpoll:Preliminary results)

[Mike Schinkel]

Brian Suda wrote:

>> --- there are elements in HTML which convay more semantic information.

Gotcha, thanks.

>> The next step is to explicitly label that abbr so parser know it is the
TYPE.
<span class="currency"><abbr class="type" title="USD">$</abbr>5.99</span> 

This gets back to what I was trying to get away from in the first place:
bloat and complexity (difficult for the newbie to do the markup correctly.)

>> --- i'm not going to debate the additional mark-up, at the end of the
day, adding semantic meaning and metadata into a page is not free. You can't
have your cake and eat it too. I think that others have shown that with gzip
the additional markup that was added and zipped is actually smaller than the
original source file anyway. And (this is completly unsubstanciated) i would
guess MOST folks don't even optimize their images, which would give you a
MUCH greater bandwidth savings than 1-2KB of semantic plain-text.

It's not about size from a machine standpoint (although at first I asked
about that concern bit I already accepting it was not an issue.)  It is
about conceptual complexity of markup for the newbie and average joe html
coder. That's what I'm most concerned about.  I think what you are showing
will cause them to just not do it unless their boss is forcing them to do it
to solve a specific business need and not just because bots might be able to
do cool things with it.  IOW, I think it will significantly impact adoption
and/or end up with lots of wrongly implemented markup.

But, as I said before if I'm the only one concerned about it then I won't
try to continue to fight this battle...

>> --- you don't need the W3C in this situation, Atom which is an IETF
standard has introduced several new rel values. So it would be possible to
introduce values through RFCs as well as W3C Recommendations.

So we can add REL attributes to (X)HTML elements that are not currently
defined to contain them?  Wouldn't that cause an XTML document so marked up
to failed a validity test?

-Mike