On 6/28/07, Pelle W <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I would say that Microformat = XML and therefor you say that "this reads
microformats" as much as you can say "this reads XML".

Well, microformats are one thing and XML is another so Microformat !=
XML. Or do you mean "Terminology-wise/linguistically can be used in
the same", in which case I ask "does anyone say 'this reads XML'" as a
_marketing_ term. We already have a perfectly good technical name for
microformats, i.e. "microformats".

On 6/28/07, Toby A Inkster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Contact-aware browser;
Calendar-aware browser;
Geo-aware browser;
etc...

Because whatever term is invented, it will probably take 5 years to
get into people's heads. Having a pile of different terms won't make
this process any easier and will probably hinder/kill it.

On 6/28/07, Tim Hodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Microformats are bits of human readable data tagged so that a machine
can do something with it.  Tagging is already a common expression of a
way of labelling content.  content being many things, microformats
being a way to tag many things.

So how about tag-aware?

Because microformats are _not_ tags.

--
David Janes
Founder, BlogMatrix
http://www.blogmatrix.com
http://blogmatrix.blogmatrix.com
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Reply via email to