[uf-new] item property (was: hAudio: audio-title/album-title vs. recording/album)

[Martin McEvoy]

On Sun, 2007-10-14 at 08:50 -0500, David Janes wrote:
> On 10/13/07, Tantek Çelik <tantek at cs.stanford.edu> wrote:
> > On 10/13/07 1:11 PM, "Martin McEvoy" <martin at weborganics.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, 2007-10-13 at 20:48 +0100, Andy Mabbett wrote:
> > >>
> > >> It's my understanding that "item" in microformats was intended purely
> > >> as
> > >> a delimiter, with the same - empty - semantic value as SPAN and DIV in
> > >> HTML.
> > >
> > > the exact same semantics are mirrored In my suggestion in hAudio, do you
> > > not think that Item can be a powerful tool in microformats if we use it
> > > the same way as a div or a span in html?
> >
> > Precisely.
> >
> >
> > > I think if we use track ...
> > >
> > >    <span class="track">
> > >             <span class="fn>Nagasaki Nightmare</span>
> > >      </span>
> > >
> > > in the context of hAudio does it have any more meaning than
> > >
> > >    <span class="item">
> > >             <span class="fn>Nagasaki Nightmare</span>
> > >      </span>
> > >
> > > track and item are both being used as container for which the contents
> > > describe what it is?
> >
> > Correct, they appear to be isomorphic.
> >
> >
> > > Anyway there is only Me at the moment supporting using *item* instead of
> > > a new microformat *track*
> >
> > I support re-use of "item" as well, rather than inventing a new term that
> > has apparently the same semantics, which would violate one of our naming
> > principles: re-use the same name to mean the same thing (instead of using
> > two names to mean the same thing).
> >
> > http://microformats.org/wiki/naming-principles#Reuse
> 
> Note that a did a moderate amount of work on this last year [1],
> looking over the options as isolating item as it's own microformat, as
> a design pattern, or as a microformat explicitly designed to be used
> as a composite. Also supported by examples [2] and formats [3]

yes I did notice that you have done a lot of work already to support an
item design pattern or submicroformat

On the Wiki Item has been tagged as Moribund? 

discussions on the list over the last few days certainly indicates that
an Item submicroformat may be an extremely important tool

Is there a reason Item never became a proposal? and also can you see any
reasons why *Item* cannot be completed?

Thanks

Martin
> 
> Regards, etc...
> 
> [1] http://microformats.org/wiki/item
> [2] http://microformats.org/wiki/item-examples
> [3] http://microformats.org/wiki/item-formats
>