[uf-discuss] Custom Fields Microformat?

[Tantek Ç elik]

Aaron,

DL/DT/DD in XHTML can already be used to semantically represent property
value sets and XOXO uses them for this purposes.  Hence XOXO already solves
this problem by reusing semantic XHTML.

Tantek


On 11/25/06 5:04 PM, "Aaron Gustafson" <aaron at easy-designs.net> wrote:

> Stephen Paul Weber wrote:
>> Creating 80%-or-more overlapping formats is evil.  XOXO can
>> be made to do anything - and this most especially.  So you
>> have to change the output code a tad more to apply it than you do for
>> some other formats
>> - what does that hurt?  The resulting code is much better structured
>> anyway... 
>>   -- Singpolyma
> 
> I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at with XOXO.
> 
> I have re-read the specs based on your comment, looking for a connection, but
> maybe I'm missing something. Can you explain why you think a property-value
> grouping microformat would overlap with XOXO? It's not really an outline? I
> realize some instances make use of a list-based construct, but it could be
> natural language as well. Furthermore, it seems to me that your argument would
> nix any microformat that utilizes an (X)HTML list construct, which I think is
> extreme. And if someone thinks a property-value list is an appropriate XOXO,
> there's no reason they couldn't combine the two. I just see property-value
> filling a particular gap in terms of microformat extensibility, particularly
> for something like hProduct.
> 
> IMHO property-value doesn't appear to overlap 80%, or even 30%, with XOXO.
> Perhaps you could explain your resoning in a bit more detail?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Aaron
> 
> ----
> Aaron Gustafson
> Easy! Designs, LLC
> http://www.easy-designs.net
> http://www.easy-reader.net
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> microformats-discuss mailing list
> microformats-discuss at microformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss