[uf-discuss] 'currency' microformat straw-man proposal.

[Guillaume Lebleu]

IFX, a retail banking standard, uses Currency Code ("CurCode") instead 
of "type" following the ISO4217 3-letter currency code, and Currency 
Amount ("CurAmt") instead of money or currency. So it would be:

<span class="currencyamount">
 <span class="currencycode">USD</span>
 <span class="value">5.00</span>
</span>


Guillaume

Andy Mabbett wrote:
> In message <CECA66E5-343A-482F-B73A-5164ACE8BDF0 at randomchaos.com>, Scott
> Reynen <scott at randomchaos.com> writes
>
>   
>> On Sep 20, 2006, at 4:18 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote:
>>
>>     
>>>> <abbr class="currency" title="USD">
>>>>       <span class="amount">42.67</span>
>>>> </abbr>
>>>>
>>>> Isn't this suggesting that "42.67" is an abbreviation for "USD"?
>>>>         
>>> I've commented before that microformats already "misuse" <abbr> in
>>> this
>>> way.
>>>       
>> Where is that?  I don't remember seeing anything like this, where one
>> piece of information is declared as abbreviation for another and
>> they're not even the same kind of information.
>>     
>
> I may be a similar discussion; sorry.
>
>
>   
>> When the data is on the page, this seems like an ideal use of the
>> include pattern:
>>
>> <http://microformats.org/wiki/include-pattern>
>>
>> Specifically, something like this:
>>
>> <th><abbr title="USD" id="usd" class="currency">Cost</abbr></th>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> <td class="money">
>>       <a class="include" href="#usd"></a>
>>       <span class="amount">42.67</span>
>> </td>
>>     
>
> An empty anchor tag? Is that semantically meaningful? It's certainly
> something I'd usually avoid using,
>
>
>   
>> When the data is not on the page at all, I'd say that's out of scope
>> for microformats.
>>     
>
> I now that's the received wisdom here; I don't agree that it's always
> the case, but this isn't the thread for that debate.
>