[uf-discuss] Microformats and RDFa not as far apart as previously thought

Sarven Capadisli csarven at gmail.com
Mon Jun 30 14:11:01 PDT 2008

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 5:23 AM, George Brocklehurst
<george.brocklehurst at gmail.com> wrote:
> Is it worth revisiting Tantek's original suggestion of using the object
> element to represent dates? [1]
> The idea was to do something like this:
>        <object data="20050125">January 25</object>
> From what Tantek said on his blog, the main reason for not using objects was
> that they were not well supported in Safari. However, Safari's object
> support is now much improved: fallbacks are supported and display:inline and
> intrinsic sizing will work correctly.  Safari 2.0.2, which came out in
> November 2005, was the first version to contain these improvements [2].

1. The purpose of the <object> element is to allow the browser to run
an external application for a non-native data type (e.g., Java applet)
2. Safari 3 is actually handling <object> the corect way. [2]

<object> is not the right way to go in this case.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/struct/objects.html#h-13.3
[2] http://microformats.org/wiki/include-pattern-feedback#Objects_and_Browser_Behavior
(see point: Sarven Capadisli 16:34, 23 Jun 2008 (PDT))

More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list