Mark Birbeck wrote:
> I don't see this:
> 
>> >       <span datatype="xsd:date" content="2006-08-31">tomorrow</span>
> 
> being difficult, when compared to this:
> 
>>         <t datetime="2006-08-31">tomorrow</t>
> 
> But note anyway that the RDFa mechanism used in XHTML 2 is actually
> more flexible than is immediately obvious. For example, it can be used
> for situations like this:
> 
>  The <span content="Tony Blair">Prime Minister</span> will today travel 
> to...

How is that better than simply writing this?

   The Prime Minister, Tony Blair, will today travel to...

>  <span datatype="xsd:date">2006-09-06</span>
> 
> And of course, the @datetime approach has to hard code what the format
> for a datetime is,  which is very prescriptive. The RDFa approach
> provides a mechanism that can be used on sites dealing with anything
> from astronomy to sports fixtures to shopping-carts to photography,
> each area of interest having its own preference for what the format
> for a 'date/time' should be.

But if every site uses a potentially different date format, how do you 
expect a UA to understand it?  Isn't it better to have a single date 
format that can be easily parsed and understood by a UA, regardless of 
what it's being used for?

-- 
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/