[uf-new] figure microformat

[Martin McEvoy]

Hello Andy

On Sat, 2008-02-23 at 21:36 +0000, Andy Mabbett wrote:
> In message <1203799926.3716.37.camel at weborganicscouk>, Martin McEvoy 
> <info at weborganics.co.uk> writes
> 
> ><div class="figure">
> >  <img class="photo" src="photo.jpeg" alt="Albert Einstein"/>
> >    <a rel="tag" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photography">Photo</a>
> >    of <cite>Albert Einstein</cite> by
> >    <span class="contributor vcard">
> >       <span class="fn">Paul Ehrenfest</span>
> >       (<span class="role">photographer</span>)
> >    </span>
> ></div>
> 
> Doesn't Albert deserve his own vcard, too?

Do you think? is that not a bit much?

would you wrap a vcard around this?

"Colored drinking fountain"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:ColoredDrinking.jpg

> 
> >photo from hcard to replace image
> >http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard#Property_List
> 
> Not all images are photos. Let's please preserve semantics.

agreed just trying to re-use ;)

> 
> >cite is just posh
> 
> Albert Einstein is not being cited, in the above example. If anyone is, 
> it's Ehrenfest.

No its the contents that is the subject of a cite.
 
> 
> >contributor from haudio
> 
> There is, as yet, no hAudio to take that from, Only a draft, in which 
> the use of "contributor" is contentious. Also, "credit" would be more 
> appropriate than "contributor" for a photo agency, for example.

agreed

> 
> >I don't think legend is necessary as it seems to be acting as a
> >container uF?
> 
> Isn't legend "a key to the symbols or pictures in a map"?

Anyway as it Is I think I misunderstood what "figure" was trying to do I
thought it was just about annotating all images with captions or
attributions. as it happens I don't think it is. Figure is just about
decorative or functional images? 

Ignore anyway :)

Thanks

Martin McEvoy

>