[uf-new] PROPOSAL: Replace hAudio FN with TITLE

[Brian Suda]

2008/2/12, Martin McEvoy <info at weborganics.co.uk>:
> On Tue, 2008-02-12 at 07:33 +0000, Brian Suda wrote:
> > --- WOW, after 6 days we have made a community wide change effecting 3
> > years of effort with only 4 people weighing in! I am sorry i haven't
> > been timely enough to offer my thoughts.

--- i volunteer with the community and have not have much time in the
last 6 days to properly give it the thought and discussions it
deserves. I would rather send a single email, then several continual
ones. Everyone benefits from a long hard thing rather than "shooting
from the hip" sorts of emails.

> as usual in this community If someone sees something they DON'T like
> they just ignore it and hope it will go away.

--- i would disagree. There are several reasons people do not answer.
Maybe it was covered by someone else, maybe they are busy, maybe they
personally are not interested.

> Only when things change do people jump up and down and say how wrong it
> is! usually without offering any reasons why or any alternatives.

--- this is certainly not the first time this discussion has come-up.
I know i have personally had a long phone call with Manu about hAudio
and several aspects of it.

I would and do not jump up and down for every change, only ones which
i feel are bad choices. People are pretty fatigued from having this
debate over and over again without gaining any ground.

The alternatives which have been discussed before are, do nothing and
use FN or use something like audio-title. Neither of which break
existing formats. Why TITLE was propose and (i feel) rushed through
with 4 +1´s is what i am not happy about - that is not community.

> > I would kindly ask that you rollback your changes until this can be
> > discussed further 4 people in a community is not consensus.
>
> How would YOU address this issue, haudio needs a "title" 94% of our use
> case examples say so, what is the point of "the process" if you cant
> work to it?

--- i believe it was solved with FN. My biggest concern is that fact
that by usurping the term TITLE you are breaking all the previous
hCards.

I´m not saying we don´t NEED a term to represent the title of a work,
just don´t re-define terms that already have meaning.

> A little guidance would be nice, instead of just saying this is wrong
> please offer a resolution, some guidance even?

--- i am very close to the original hCard work, so i was not trying to
involve myself early in this discussion and sway the thought process.
I purposely (what i thought was the impartial thing to do)  let some
discussion move forward without my "interference". That discussion was
a few "+1"s and and an re-explanation of the original question. That
isn't a discussion.

The original logic in the question is flawed. The first portion is correct

> FN in hCard means "the formatted name of a person or orgainzation".
> FN in hAudio currently means "the formatted name of an audio recording".

It is the next portion which is misleading and wrong:

> TITLE in hCard means "job title"
> TITLE in hAudio means "audio recording title"

It should be
TITLE in hCard means the Job Title of the person or organization
TITLE in hAudio means the Job Title of the audio recording

The correct logic is completely fine, but that is not what the
proposal is trying to do. It is attempting to undo the definition of
TITLE across all microformats, which has been discussed before and
rejected in such formats as the citation.

Due to lack of any sort of discussion, decent or any massive support,
i was not expecting to see such an important edit to the wiki page.

i´m not against haudio or having some sort of title property for the
format, what i do not like is attempting to break any format with any
property that has already been defined. I believe this issue is
already solved with FN, (IMHO) there is no need for this proposal to
use TITLE.

So now you have my -1.

-brian

-- 
brian suda
http://suda.co.uk