[uf-new] First draft of hAudio proposal
msporny at digitalbazaar.com
Wed May 2 06:55:54 PDT 2007
Martin McEvoy wrote:
> Manu first I would like to say that I understand what you are trying to
> do with the "." my example would be class="collection" the parent or
> group, class="collection.Track_1" is my child or item,
> class="collection.Track_2" is another child or item, It simpler and
> "works" but I don't think it will be widely accepted, It goes against
> the grain for me because it is machine data, hidden, not people data
> visible and easy to style.
It would be very simple to use a 'collection-item' paradigm - but that
doesn't address the problem of sparse collections of audio recordings.
If you are going to weigh in with proposed solutions, please familiarize
yourself with the grouping-examples page first (I know you've done this,
Martin. The statement is intended to some of the others on the list that
might want to weigh in on the discussion, but might not know about the
prior analysis work):
* 100% of examples contained some form of grouping
* 67%: ordered
* 65%: unordered
* 62%: non-sparse
* 54%: sparse
As the analysis shows - we need a solution that can do both sparse and
non-sparse grouping. All of the non-name-space-based solutions proposed
thus far do not support sparse grouping.
I realize there is an aversion to name spacing. It would be nice if we
could avoid the issue entirely. The data to back-up the need for
something equivalent to name spacing is there. I have not seen any data
to back up the counter-point to not using local name spacing on a web
page. If somebody knows where this resides, please point us to it.
A proposed solution must be able to handle all 4 types of grouping.
More information about the microformats-new