On 2/8/06 3:44 PM, "Andy Mabbett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Carl Beeth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >> One of the potholes is in my opinion the little intro text on the home >> page: >> >> What are microformats >> Designed for humans first and machines second, Note - the notion of focusing on human needs and behaviors first is actually both quite essential for microformats and a huge distinction between microformats and numerous other standards efforts which are focused on "building a web for machines" etc. Thus it is critical to point this out at the beginning like this. >> microformats are a set >> of simple, open data formats built upon existing and widely adopted >> standards. Learn more about microformats. And those are also some direct summaries of the principles. These are the heart of what microformats are and thus I don't think it makes sense to change this statement at all unless you can think of a better way to express the principles in a succinct human-readable statement. > How about: > > Microformats are a set of tools, This is false. They are not tools. > which use widely-adopted > standards Mostly true. "built upon" is more accurate than just "use" though. > to make common types of data (for example events or > licensing terms) easy to read, by both humans and machines. I think this has too much detail for a short summary statement. > They > do this by describing them in a simple and versatile, yet > strictly defined, way. Learn more about microformats. > > Of course, there may be more suitable examples. Overall, I think this revision loses both the nice brevity and the precision of the current summary statement. Thanks, Tantek _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
