On 10/20/05, Joe Gregorio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Luke, > Thanks for writing this up. I like the microformat approach > one several levels in that it is viewable in a browser and > resuses an existing format. I also agree that the difference > in effort between parsing a microformat approach > and a Collection Document is insignificant. >
I am glad you agree. It *is* nice to maintain one less document and keep your data visible and use well understood semantics that allow a representation to convey meaning to a massively wider range of both people and machines. > On the other hand the microformat approach > does have one big drawback and that is the lack of > a unique mime-type. This makes dispatching to different > clients from within a browser difficult, and for that > reason I am not in favor of using a microformat based approach. > Joe, I have to take issue with your logic here. This is a challenge that implementers can face or not as they please. Door #1: Take the challenge and reap the benefits if you are clever. Door #2: Just pretend that it is not XHTML and everything still works. What is the drawback? It is an opportunity for those who want to work for it and no cost to the rest. - Luke
