[uf-new] hAudio Title Possible Alternative?

[Sarven Capadisli]

NAME appears to be a better solution then TITLE, FN, or something
along the lines of a prefixed "object class term" (e.g., AUDIO-TITLE).

* No conflicts with hCard (since this was one of the issues we had previously)
* No prefixes or the whole namespace dilemmas.
* Reusable for other media type formats (e.g., video title) and objects.

Based on the definitions of "name", NAME would be appropriate to
*distinguish* one object from another. Is this in any way create a
conflict (perhaps a misconception) if the hAudio object were to
contain multiple NAMEs? (re:
http://microformats.org/wiki/haudio-cheatsheet#Properties states that
TITLE may occur more than once).

Hope that made sense.

-Sarven


On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 4:49 PM, Martin McEvoy <info at weborganics.co.uk> wrote:
> Hello All
>
> This is to try and help the stalled hAudio Title Issue
> http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-new/2008-February/001532.html
>
> hAudio title is an Issue because its meaning is not the same as the
> hcard definition a "job title" unless the title attribute in haudio
> means "Job title" we cant use it because microformats describe single
> precise instances and do not have the ability to disambiguate... there
> are probably more reasons but the above is a good reason why a solution
> should be found, the development and adoption of the haudio microformat
> can not realistically continue until this issue is resolved.
>
> So I have been spending some time recently studying the audio info
> examples pages asking How Many of the examples use the word "Title" to
> mean an audio title? we want to call this thing "title" lets find some
> hard evidence?
> http://microformats.org/wiki/audio-info-examples
>
> Out of 54 working examples
> 20 use the word or have the word Title in markup  37%
> 34 use just song, track or nothing in markup  63%
>
> As you can see there is no clear cut 80/20 result, so the action may be
> at this point to choose what would seem to be second best and choose
> "title" but 63% of the examples are doing something else, In most cases
> nothing meaningful just naming things.
>
> Alternative use "NAME" instead of "TITLE" as this seems to be what the
> majority of the examples are doing simply naming the objects.
>
> name http://www.answers.com/name&r=67
> "1, A word or words by which an entity is designated and distinguished
> from others."
>
> good...
>
> Name http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name
> "A name is a label for a human or animal, thing, place, product (as in a
> brand name) and even an idea or concept, normally used to distinguish
> one from another. Names can identify a class or category of things, or a
> single thing, either uniquely, or within a given context."
>
> better...
>
> possible microformats definition
>
> name - A label for the object or thing, contents are a short textual
> description of the object or thing.
>
> hmm! ...that's just my deffinition :)
>
> I have dumped all my notes on why "name" may be more desirable than
> "title" in a single text file which may make interesting reading
>
> http://tinyurl.com/yt7g4u
>
> Its interesting to add that a "name" microformat may enhance the "n"
> definition on http://microformats.org/wiki/existing-classes
> where it says "The name of the unit" name can be hyperlinked to the
> "name" definition of "A short textual description of the object or
> thing"
>
> I dont know if any of the above helps, It may even muddy the waters more
> comments feedback would be nice.
>
> Thanks all
>
> Martin McEvoy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> microformats-new mailing list
> microformats-new at microformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
>