On Jan 13, 2006, at 9:08 AM, Paul Bryson wrote:
"Ryan King" wrote...
On Jan 12, 2006, at 10:02 PM, Paul Bryson wrote:
So, how do you provide that information
without looking silly?
How do people provide it now without looking silly? Do they?
Good question. I believe I've seen it said, but not without looking
extraneous. Maybe a bigger question would be, "if there were a way to
provide this information, would people use it?"
That's a very good question and I think the way to answer it is to go
back to my previous question– do people state the lower bound for
ratings? Do they say "I give this a 3 on a scale from 0 to 10
foobars"? Or do they just say "I give this 3 out of 10 foobars"?
I would suggest that the latter is overwhelming more common than the
former. If you can show a number of examples of the former, though,
I'd be more than willing to recant.
Of course, we're using a specific, standardized time format here, so
there are different concerns.
I'm looking for a specific, standardized way to provide range
information.
If there isn't a decent, standardized way to provide the
information, then I
really have nothing to that.
Yeah, AFAICT, there's no commonly used format for ranges used on the
web (or elsewhere, for that matter), so we have little prior art in
terms of previous formats. However, we still have prior art in terms
of examples of emergent human behavior on the web.
-ryan
--
Ryan King
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
