[uf-new] hAudio - audio-album and audio-podcast

Colin Barrett timber at lava.net
Tue Jun 5 16:45:20 PDT 2007

On Jun 5, 2007, at 4:39 PM, Martin McEvoy wrote:

> On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 15:00 -0700, Colin Barrett wrote:
>> On Jun 5, 2007, at 2:20 PM, Scott Reynen wrote:
>>> The label "haudio" appears to be describing two distinct concepts
>>> here (1: album information, 2: individual track information), which
>>> I find confusing.  That these two concepts share some properties,
>>> but that doesn't make them the same thing.  I think there are two
>>> many layers of abstraction here.  "haudio" should describe something
>>> specific, e.g. an audio recording, not a vague collection of
>>> metadata that could apply to a wide variety of things.
>> They're actually, IMO, almost entirely the same.
>> A classical recording is a good example -- unlike popular music, the
>> tracks on the album are often merely segments of a larger whole, f.e.
>> "Beethoven's Fifth" is comprised of four movements. All of the same
>> information that can be applied to a "track" can be applied to an
>> "album" or "playlist". They're really just divisions of a larger
>> whole. The only information I could see an album of playlist needing
>> that a track wouldn't would be: # of tracks and # of discs.
> Colin you have a good point here
> haudio would not be extended far enough to suit the classical
> communities needs when you take into account that Beethoven has nine
> symphonies with a total of 37 movements with sub properties of

You would be marking up a specific recording of the symphony with  
haudio, though, so you would have information *about that recording,*  
not about the specific work of music in question.

Another example: You don't mark up information about the song "Star  
Spangled Banner," you mark up the information about Jimi Hendrix's  
particular recording of it. e.g, year would be 1967, not 1814.


More information about the microformats-new mailing list