[uf-new] First draft of hAudio proposal

[David Janes]

On 5/2/07, Andy Mabbett <andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
> In message
> <21e523c20705020405o1f08c1d3s29a8c8bef104a830 at mail.gmail.com>, David
> Janes <davidjanes at blogmatrix.com> writes
>
>
> >> >> hAudio (haudio)
> >> >> - title. required. text.
> >> >  title is already taken to mean something else, so TITLE is not an
> >> > option. hCard uses TITLE for job-title. I would suggest FN instead.
>
> >> We could use FN,
> >> but 'work-title' is far more accurate.
>
> >If you mean what most people do by "title", then FN is the correct
> >thing to use.
>
>
> How does that square with the principle of making things easier for
> publishers? "title" (or "movie-title" or "job-title", or whatever) is
> surely easier for publisher to remember, and more obvious when updating
> code,  than the awful "FN"!
>
> How is "FN" supported, in preference to "title " or "*-title" by the
> evidence gathered?

Did you even read what I wrote Andy? If they want to use something
that means the same as FN, then FN is the correct thing to do. If they
want to do something that doesn't mean the same as FN, then something
else is the correct thing to do. I'm not sure how much clearer than
can be written. I didn't express a preference either way -- just gave
some advice since I've already been down this path, and that's the way
it's supposed to work.

As for the fact that FN is ugly, well, I've only got 24 hours in a day
and revisiting established decisions made long in the past  for
aesthetic and minor mnemonic concerns isn't going to be part of that
day.

-- 
David Janes
Founder, BlogMatrix
http://www.blogmatrix.com
http://blogmatrix.blogmatrix.com