[uf-new] Namespace anti-pattern and hAudio TITLE (was: hAudio FN or Title)

[Manu Sporny]

Tantek Çelik wrote:
> context is not the same as namespaces.  namespaces provide one form of
> context, but not all contexts are namespaces.  in the case of compound
> microformats, the context that is used is hierarchical containment.

Tantek,

The issue is not that cut and dry - and the definition of namespace as
it relates to Microformats has been twisted to mean something different
than it does in the rest of the world. Just so that we're on the same
page, everyone should read the standard definition of a namespace[1] and
the computer science definition of a namespace[2]. More specifically,
the following line is quite clear about the relationship of a
namespace[1] and a context and is in direct conflict with your definition:

"A namespace is also called a context, as the valid meaning of a name
can change depending on what namespace applies."

If you meant, "fully qualified namespaces" instead of "namespace", then
I would agree with you. "Context is not the same as a fully qualified
namespace" is true - however, this is not what you said and I believe
this to be a very long-running issue with Microformats:

Oversimplification of the namespace problem.

What Microformats have an issue with is "fully qualified namespaces",
which is fair - that concept adds unnecessary complexity as far as the
community is concerned. However, that is not what is written up on the
wiki in the anti-pattern section on namespaces[4]. The anti-pattern
makes it sound like Microformats don't use namespaces at all - which is
where all the confusion arises.

Microformats use "emulated namespaces"[3], for proof, we need only look
to hAtom[5]:

* entry-title
* entry-content
* entry-summary

In this example, "entry" is an "emulated namespace". This community has
been mis-using the word "namespace" for several years now, and it's
causing too many problems for those that are attempting to understand
why we allow "entry-title", but don't allow "namespaces".

The definition that the Microformats community uses for 'namespace' is
flawed and thus the logic becomes flawed - this needs to be fixed.

> "fn" *does* have meaning - it means "formatted name".

No, that is what "FN" expands to, "Formatted Name" - the semantic
meaning of that is useless without context... without a namespace. I am
asserting that very few of us, if any, mark up all the FNs on a page
just because we can - names of buildings, cities, people, animals,
countries.

"FN" is semantically void without context, without a higher-level
Microformat to encapsulate it, without a namespace.

> Inside an hCard it means the formatted name of either a person,
> organization, or location (depending on the specifics of the hCard).
> 
> Inside an hReview item it means the formatted name of an item.

So, it *DOES* have different meaning when used in a different context?
The object (what you are naming) of the FN changes based on context.

>> So, who is going to make an argument against using TITLE in hAudio?
> The problem of such use of the term "title" is twofold.
> 1) it's already used to mean "job title" in the context of microformats.

Wait, what!? So FN can have two slightly different meanings based on
it's context, but TITLE cannot? Why is that?

This is exactly the issue:

FN's meaning changes slightly based on if it is used in hCard or hReview.

TITLE's meaning is locked in to mean "job title" in all Microformats.

There is a glaring lack of consistency here, would anybody like to
elaborate on why we're OK with that inconsistency?

> 2) the concept that it is being proposed to represent is the *name* of an
> audio item.  "fn" already means the name of an item.  we should not
> introduce a new term to mean the same thing as an existing term.

Incorrect, the concept that it is being proposed to represent is the
*title* of an audio recording. TITLE is widely used for that purpose in
the english language. We should not restrict that word to mean "job
title", when the English language is fairly clear that "TITLE" can mean
a variety of things[6] based on the context in which it is used.

-- manu

PS: This is also the reason that I don't spend more time on Microformats
- these discussions are very unsatisfying... I've never had to argue
about what the meaning of a word such as "TITLE" actually means at the
W3C or any of the other communities that we work with. If we are unsure,
we look it up in a dictionary and that is usually the end of the
discussion. Microformat's seem to redefine key words like "namespace"
and "title" as a means to an end, which is wholly frustrating as you
need to re-learn parts of the English language in an attempt to
contribute to the community.

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namespace
[2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namespace_%28computer_science%29
[3]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namespace_%28computer_science%29#Emulating_namespaces
[4]http://microformats.org/wiki/namespaces
[5]http://microformats.org/wiki/hatom#Entry_Title
[6]http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=title