[wp-hackers] Any chance of the "Kubrick vs hReview" patch being accepted prior to WP 2.0 release?

[Phillip Pearson]

Elliotte Harold wrote:

> David House wrote:
>
>> Using namespaced XML goes against the design principles of
>> microformats. They're designed to be easy, simple, QUICK to read and
>> write, no need to bother around with things like namespacing. In
>> essence, why use complex XML features when a simple classname will do?
>
> But will a simple classname do? It doesn't seem to be working here, 
> and that's a problem.
>
> Even when it might, it's often somewhat easier to work with the real 
> names on the elements rather than hiding them in class attributes. My 
> own HTML pages have quite a few non-standard, invalid elements that I 
> happily process with XML tools. I could probably change them to <div 
> class="name"> and <span class="name"> instead, but my code would 
> become more complex to handle that; and I don't see what anyone would 
> gain by me doing this.

Another plus for using classnames is that you don't need to do any DTD 
hackery to make your HTML validate with the W3C validator.  Namespaced 
XML would be nice if the validator ignored namespaced elements, but it 
doesn't ...

The microformats group could have made things easier by choosing less 
common words for their classnames, or perhaps prefixing them by 
something unlikely to be commonly used.  It doesn't sound like they're 
going to back down on this, though.

Personally, from now on whenever I'm using CSS for styling, I'm going to 
prefix all my classnames by something to do with my application. 

Cheers,
Phil