[uf-new] First draft of hAudio proposal
msporny at digitalbazaar.com
Wed May 2 10:18:05 PDT 2007
Martin McEvoy wrote:
> Manu please help me out here because I am having difficulty
> understanding your logic?
> As you know I do not disagree with your proposal for collections but...
> To me the ".", period, or hidden class, in xml/xhtml is a known empty
> element i.e they create a space along with "a-b" "a_b" and "a~b"
> If I wanted to connect two items I would use "a|b" "a/b" "a:b" or "a,b"
> you can also use "a?b" "a&b" as connectors
> so why have you chose "." a period to describe your relationships in a
The decision to use '.' was almost completely arbitrary. It is commonly
used to delineate object hierarchy in programming languages. Note that
delineating object hierarchy is subtly different from delineating class
name spaces. The grouping proposal is about "naming local object
hierarchy" not "global class name spaces".
The '/', '?', and '&' separators were not used because they already have
a loose semantic meaning on the web as separators. Perhaps that is more
of an argument for using those separators than against.
I'm not opposed to using a different separator. Although, I don't think
the separator is what most are concerned about on the list. Most of the
concern is coming from the following two camps:
* Are sparse groups really a problem?! 
* Names spaces are pure evil! Hang anybody that proposes anything
that looks like a name space! :) 
PS: Scott - I'll get around to addressing your point about showing
examples of sparse grouping. Unfortunately, I'll be trapped in
conference calls for the rest of the day.
More information about the microformats-new