[uf-new] Issue HP6 - P-V seems like a catch-all for hProduct
davidjanes at blogmatrix.com
Wed Feb 18 01:19:28 PST 2009
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 1:12 AM, Manu Sporny <msporny at digitalbazaar.com> wrote:
> hProduct currently allows the author to use the P-V pattern for anything
> that doesn't fit neatly into hProduct. While it is true that this is a
> nice way to expand hProduct and see where future versions of hProduct
> might need to be expanded, there is a danger that over-use of the P-V
> pattern will result in weird issues between future Microformats.
> For example, if hProduct lists a number of P-Vs and another Microformat
> starts using P-V heavily, there will be clashes between the overlapping
> Microformats. These clashes will result in the wrong P-Vs being assigned
> to the wrong object.
> It also seems a bit sloppy - using P-V may be a clear sign that the
> problem being solved isn't small enough, or that you're attempting to
> boil the oceans in a clever way. Anybody else have some thoughts about
> the use or abuse of P-V in Microformats?
I got hung up on this one too, wrote a post, deleted it. Thoughts:
1) my thinking is that the "semanticness" doesn't go down to the P and
V, that we know that products have lists of property and values but at
this level we _attach no meaning to the terms_ beyond the fact that
they are there. And later on, if we decide (e.g.) that "Number of
Wheels"/"4" has standardizable meaning, we can define
"number-of-wheels" and add that as class value.
2) is this just not a DL? we are fine with that...
3) why not use a DL? I note alternatively that hAtom allows both H#
More information about the microformats-new