[uf-new] hAudio/table incompatibility
martin at weborganics.co.uk
Fri Oct 5 10:31:37 PDT 2007
On Fri, 2007-10-05 at 09:44 +0100, Julian Stahnke wrote:
> > PROPOSAL:
> > TRACK can be either plain text or marked up using HAUDIO.
> > This approach would make the following markup valid:
> > <div class="haudio">
> > ...
> > <span class="album">Album Title</span>
> > ...
> > <span class="track">Song Name</span>
> > ...
> > </div>
> I love this!
[ ... ]
> > It shouldn't work differently from hCalendar, and I agree again. We
> > should bring hAudio more in line with hCalendar. Do the following two
> > examples work for everybody?
> > This would be valid:
> > <span class="contributor vcard">
> > <span class="fn org">Phish</span>
> > </span>
> > and so would this:
> > <span class="contributor">Phish</span>
> Again, I think this would be great. Big music sites like Last.fm
> would have no problem to implement all those nested vcard etc. in
> most cases, even though they may sometimes be a bit heavyweight.
> ‘Regular’ people like bloggers who just want to write about music and
> mark it up accordingly would have a hard time understanding all that
> though, I think. (At least that’s my impression talking to people.)
> So this simpler proposal makes perfect sense to me.
Thank you for your comments Julian at least someone on the list Is
starting to make sense.
I have been wrestling with the current proposal of hAudio since Manu
made his announcement  And frankly the current proposal is starting
to make less and less sense to me, With each different proposal the
concept of hAudio gets more and more vague. and honestly I dont like it
at all the way hAudio stands now.
What happened to keep it Simple, and *Meaningful*?
So let Keep it simple eh?
<span class="audio-title">Album Title</span>
<span class="contributor vcard">[...]Artist[...]</span>
<span class="track-title">Track One</span>
<span class="track-title">Track Two</span>
Notice no need to Reiterate hAudio over and over again, hAudio only=20
needs to be declared *ONCE* because the entire contents *ARE* hAudio
Does hAudio really need to be more involved than the above example?
I feel the more we bloat hAudio with *not* well thought of semantic
class names such as *Album* (a container class or object not a title)
and *Podcast* (which is also a container class and not a title) the
Publishers are going to use hAudio because it makes it difficult to
understand and integrate with their webpages.
> One element per property and you just wrap the whole thing in an
> haudio element. That’s easy to explain and still covers the very
> basic information one would want to have. And if you want to have
> more details, you still can. I think that would be cool.
> microformats-new mailing list
> microformats-new at microformats.org
More information about the microformats-new