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

[Dougal Campbell]

Phillip Pearson wrote:
> [...]
> 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.

Using less common words for microformat class names would go totally 
against the grain of what they are trying to accomplish. They're 
supposed to be easy to implement, and they're supposed to be 
human-readable. Thus: simple, descriptive class names.

Again, I think that people are attacking this "problem" from the wrong 
end. Mainly because there really isn't a problem to speak of. If you're 
going to go to the trouble to add microformatted data to your site, is 
it really that much more trouble to add some properly scoped styles to 
target them?

The solution to this particular example is as easy as adding this style 
to the page:

   .hreview .description {
     background-color: inherit;
     color: inherit;
   }

Voila. No more conflicting styles in Kubrick.

If you care enough about microformats to use them, then when there are 
conflicts between the format and your template, you're simply going to 
have to find some way to resolve them. There's no way that you're going 
to get Kubrick to be compatible with hAtom without some fairly serious 
modifications, for instance. But for most of the other microformats, 
you'll be able to resolve conflicts by increasing the specificity of the 
appropriate CSS rules.

-- 
Dougal Campbell <dougal at gunters.org>
http://dougal.gunters.org/