[uf-new] Re: hAudio FN or Title

[Martin McEvoy]

On Sat, 2008-02-02 at 14:20 -0500, Manu Sporny wrote:
> 
> This is the start of an argument for namespaces:
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namespace 

I think microformats already DO support limited namespaces, not fully
loaded namespaces like RDFa does, but kind of micro-namespaces, its
difficult for me to explain what I mean but here goes...

"...since we were reusing the semantics of the IETF Atom standard, we
very much wanted to reuse the vocabulary as well to minimize confusion
and mean precisely the same semantics as defined in the Atom RFC 4287,
and thus a few of the hAtom properties appear to be prefixed
(entry-title, entry-content, entry-summary) in order to literally reuse
those terms from the RFC (title, content, summary)."

http://microformats.org/wiki/hatom-faq#Why_does_hAtom_use_class_name_namespaces

Interesting I think?

This Is why earlier in the tread I suggested we use "audio-title" it is
mimicking the concept of "entry-title"

hAudio does not follow any RFC standard like hAtom does, but in my view
it does in a way because it is being built to a Microformats standard
using the "process". hAudio will (eventually) be an audio "standard" so
it makes sense to use a class namespace like "audio-[...]".

What do you think?

Martin McEvoy