[uf-new] collection-design-pattern proposal

[Manu Sporny]

Ryan King wrote:
>> I propose that we use this collection-design-pattern mentioned above for
>> specifying all collections due to the following advances over all of the
>> other proposed methods:
> 
> Using the word "pattern" makes is sound like this has been used before
> multiple times. Until something is used in several microformats, I see
> no reasonable way to call it a design pattern.

Point taken - the reason it was proposed as a pattern is that it would
be used in audio, video and images - and could be used in geo. It also
doesn't use the 'class' attribute to make itself known.

Is it okay if we call it grouping-examples for now and go from there?

Also, how many uFs does something have to be in to be considered a
pattern? I couldn't find anything on the wiki outlining the proposal
process for patterns.

-- manu