[whatwg] Conformance criteria for hCard and hCalendar

[Matthew Raymond]

Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Apr 2006, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> Are there even any conformance requirements for these formats? (The 
>> specs seem to encourage view source instead of pointing to conformance 
>> criteria.)
> 
> These questions would be better forwarded to the microformats.org mailing 
> lists. The WHATWG spec won't make the <card> and <calendar> elements use 
> hCard and hCalendar until/unless the relevant specs are much clearer about 
> the points you raise.

Will there be a <resume> element for hResume[1]? How about a <review>
element for hReview[2]? Exactly where does this end?

>> Also, an example in the Web Apps 1.0 spec suggests that the <card> 
>> element does not replace the class='vcard' root of the card. It would be 
>> nice to be explicit about this in the prose. (Why is the content model 
>> then any block level elements instead of exactly one block level element 
>> or zero or one block level elements?)
> 
> The <card> and <calendar> sections in the WA1 spec right now are nothing 
> but placeholders (hence the "TBW" marker on the section headers).

Questions:

1) When using XHTML, is there any benefit the <card> and <calendar>
elements plus hCard and hCalendar would give over something like RDF
vCard[3]?

2) What standards bodies control hCard and hCalendar?

3) If we're going to create markup to essentially "bind" microformats,
why not have more general elements for this purpose rather than two
elements that target specific microformats?

4) It's beginning to look like microformats are just a way of getting
around HTML's own lack of namespace support. Are standardized
microformats really any better than the HTML namespaces Internet
Explorer introduced?


[1] http://microformats.org/wiki/hresume
[2] http://microformats.org/wiki/hreview
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/vcard-rdf