andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk
Sat Nov 3 19:26:19 CDT 2007
<8fc6b4c30711031555p11178763v2e019dc4e2875e62 at mail.gmail.com>, Michael
Lee <mikelee at email.unc.edu> writes
>I'd not heard of microformats yet, and it sounds both interesting and useful.
They are - and there are many millions of microformats already published
in the wild.
>I'm trying to figure out how this won't cause problems with the
>ambiguity of names between different projects, including things that
>aren't microformats at all.
>So one example on the wiki was:
> <span class="species">
> <span class="binominal">Larus glaucoides</span>
> <span class="subsp">kumlieni</span>
>shouldn't the wrapping element be something like this:
> <span class="microformat.species">
>or <span class="microformat"><span class="species">
The current draft uses:
as the parent wrapper, but the final result is more likely to be
something like "hbiota" (in keeping with hCard, hCalendar, and so on),
to avoid such ambiguity.
>Even better, I think some would argue this is a use for RDF or custom
>element names, as it would be briefer
>I don't really understand RDF, but from what I understand of it, it
>seems to me that it might be a more elegant and flexible solution than
>agnostic HTML elements with class names.
Microformats and RDF are not the same; though this isn't the place to go
The model used in microformats, using HTML classes (and in some cases,
but not for species, 'rel' attributes) is already established.
* Are you using Microformats, yet: <http://microformats.org/> ?
More information about the Taxacom