Send microformats-discuss mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of microformats-discuss digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Citation format straw proposal on the wiki (Breton Slivka)
2. Re: seeking clarification w/r/to hCard and RFCs 2425/2426
(Kevin Marks)
3. Re: Citation format straw proposal on the wiki (Ross Singer)
4. attention microformat (Nick Swan)
5. Re: Citation format straw proposal on the wiki (Scott Reynen)
6. Re: seeking clarification w/r/to hCard and RFCs 2425/2426
(C. Hudley)
7. Re: Citation format straw proposal on the wiki (Tim White)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 21:47:30 -0700
From: Breton Slivka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Citation format straw proposal on the wiki
To: Microformats Discuss <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
I suppose it's worth fleshing out what I mean by modularization a bit
more, because I think it's all that's neccesary to infer type.
Suppose we have a core citation format, such as Tim White shows,
containing the following properties/classes. hCite
Author (hcard)
Title
Date
Collaborators
Description
Catalogue Number
Then we have properties that are specific to books/journals
Pages
Volume
If these properties are present, then we know that this item is
probably not say.. a photo or a painting, and contains all the
properties which allow it to be pased the same whether it's a book or
a journal. Combine it with hCite and suddenly we have bookCite
The properties specific to artwork might be:
medium
dimensions
add them to hCite and we have artCite
Then suppose we have properties specific to a photo
Aperture
Fstop
Camera
We add those to artCite and suddenly with have photoCite,
demonstrated.
<cite class="hcite">
<p class "author fn">Ansel Adams</p>
<span class="title">Siesta Lake</span>
<span class="camera">8x10 view camera</span>
<span class="medium">Gelatin Silver Print</span>
</cite>
From the presence of "camera" we can glean that this is an instance
of photocite. But a generic parse can still glean the Author and
Title properties. A domain specific parser has the extra data it
needs for cataloguing, or whatever other task required. The domain
specific parser could safely ignore hCites lacking any of the
properties required for photoCite. Etc. etc.
In short, one core format that everything can understand, with
properties available for domain specific applications. The careful
categorization and "branding" of each module helps to keep things
simple for site authors.
Basically I'm basing this off the "modularization of xhtml". For
instance, most site authors only need the basic modules for xhtml.
They have no need for something like the Ruby module. But there's a
large portion of the audience that does, and when they need that,
it's available as a module.
Does that make sense?
On Mar 29, 2006, at 7:17 PM, Tim White wrote:
Well, this is a lot to process at the end of the day. Here's just a
few
of my initial thoughts.
First, and I've asked this before, what are we trying to do? For
me, I
just want a *simple* way to mark up books, be it a title, title &
author, or slightly more.
We are NOT replacing OpenURL, etc.
We are NOT building library/scholarly citation records
(in my opinion)
Those already exist and, as has been shown on the list, are very
complicated. They also serve a specialized audience and I don't think
reflect the 80/20 of general users.
The format should be as simple as possible.
As for type attributes (ie, class="book"), Bryan Suda and I had a
lengthy discussion a while ago about that. I too believed it was
necessary, but came to see that it is purely extraneous metadata.
Look
at a sample citation, something like:
R. Buckminster Fuller. Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth, Pocket
Books, 1970, pp. 13, 14.
No where does it tell you what this is. We infer (from the blog
post in
this case) that it is a book. Or, we look it up via Amazon or library
card catalog to find that it is a book.
Think of hCard. For organizations do we include a type identifier?
I.e.: <span class="org webdevelopment">Webs - R - Us</span>.
A simple format also makes the MF usable for more than books.
Works of
art have been mentioned. Just use the same layout:
Edvard Munch. "The Scream", 1893.
It still has a creator, title and date.
--- Alf Eaton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
OK, so a minimal microformat for a citation could look like this:
<x class="citation [type]">
<x class="title">Item title</x>
<x class="creators"><hcards></x>
<x class="container citation [type]"><hcitation for the
container></x>
<x class="pages">n-n</x> [and anything else specific to this
particular type of citation]
</x>
This seems to be on the right track; similar to what I had in mind.
At work, we have need of a citation microformat and are going to be
using mark up like this for now:
<div class="citation">
<span class="articleTitle">"Accelerated Aging: Human Progeroid
Syndromes."</span>
<span class="author">Author Name</span>.
<span class="pubTitle">Encyclopedia of Aging</span>.
<span class="volume">Vol. 1.</span>
<span class="pubCity">New York:</span>
<span class="publisher">Macmillan Reference USA,</span>
<span class="pubYear">2002</span>.
</div>
It's not perfect, but it fits our needs. Transforming that:
<cite class="hcitation">
<span class="articleTitle">"Accelerated Aging: Human Progeroid
Syndromes."</span>
<span class="author vcard"><span class="fn">Author
Name</span></span>.
<span class="pubTitle">Encyclopedia of Aging</span>.
<span class="volume">Vol. 1.</span>
<div class="publisher vcard">
<span class="locality">New York:</span>
<span class="org fn">Macmillan Reference USA</span>,
<abbr class="dtpublished" title="2002">2002</abbr>.
</div>
</cite>
I know it isn't perfect, but it's based on reusing existing MF,
and (I
hope)in keeping with the principles.
(In looking back at it, wouldn't it be possible to do only on vCard,
perhaps way up in <cite>, that would encompass the author and
publisher? Those who know parsing (Brian S.) -- does that screw up
hCard parsing?)
~ Tim
<a href="http://www.tjameswhite.com";>www.tjameswhite.com</a>
<a href="http://www.spreadfirefox.com/?
q=affiliates&id=12227&t=1">Get Firefox!</a>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 18:42:35 -0800
From: Kevin Marks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] seeking clarification w/r/to hCard and RFCs
2425/2426
To: Microformats Discuss <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
On Mar 27, 2006, at 11:10 PM, C. Hudley wrote:
Like I said: things like protocols and data formats. Version and
revision numbers. Publication dates. Specification names and
standards organization references. Arbitrary names of
services-people-deliver that aren't standard in any way. Some of it
could fit into hCard but other parts would be an awkward fit at best.
This would be in the context of service discovery: for some resource,
or for some organizational context, show me a directory of available
or relevant services. If you're familiar with OpenURL resolvers, I'm
thinking of something like their result screens, but bigger, and with
a usable design and the option to machine-parse reliably. Which
is to
say, not really like current OpenURL resolver result screens.
Do you mean services and protocols in the computing sense?
If so you should look into the DNS-SD specification for service
discovery, as this is a deployed and working one that builds on DNS.
Not really connected with microformats though.
http://dns-sd.org
(this is part of zeroconf, as popularized by Apple under the names
Rendezvous and Bonjour)
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 00:15:55 -0500
From: "Ross Singer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Citation format straw proposal on the wiki
To: "Microformats Discuss" <[email protected]>
Message-ID:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
On 3/29/06, Breton Slivka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Then we have properties that are specific to books/journals
Pages
Volume
If these properties are present, then we know that this item is
probably not say.. a photo or a painting, and contains all the
properties which allow it to be pased the same whether it's a book or
a journal. Combine it with hCite and suddenly we have bookCite
I just want to point out that ambiguity might not be bad for
determining
what an item isn't, but it's not good practice for determining what
an item
is.
I am currently going through our 705k marc records trying to
determine what
each record actually is representing and if it's not explicitly set
(which
is sadly really only done with conference proceedings and journals) it
becomes a guessing game as what these things really are. In my
case, I can
probably actually find the thing and determine what it is (although
that
won't scale, obviously), but a citation I might find on the web
won't afford
me that.
Explicitly stating what an item is a much sounder approach.
-Ross.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-discuss/
attachments/20060330/b9117640/attachment-0001.htm
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 11:51:12 +0100
From: "Nick Swan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [uf-discuss] attention microformat
To: [email protected]
Message-ID:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi all,
first message to the emailing list after attending the microformats
and
structured blogging session with Marc Canter and Tantek at Mix06.
I'm interested in using the attention microformat for an
application I'm
working on, and so am seeking clarification as to where this format
currently is. Checking the wiki entries on the microformat page it
seems as
though initial discussions began, but didn't get much further:
http://microformats.org/wiki/attention
Checking on the Technorati wiki there is some more information and
even a
sample in microformat:
http://developers.technorati.com/wiki/attentionxml
sample:
http://developers.technorati.com/wiki/AttentionSample
Is this the format that people are currently using who are working on
attention applications? We are keen to use a standard format so to
allow
people to move their attention data from one service to another, so
would
really appreciate any pointers
Many thanks
Nick Swan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-discuss/
attachments/20060330/764e5cdd/attachment-0001.htm
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 07:12:49 -0600
From: Scott Reynen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Citation format straw proposal on the wiki
To: Microformats Discuss <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
On Mar 29, 2006, at 11:15 PM, Ross Singer wrote:
Explicitly stating what an item is a much sounder approach.
I agree. What if I want to cite a photograph and all I know about it
is the photographer's name and the title of the photograph?
Peace,
Scott
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 08:40:05 -0500
From: "C. Hudley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] seeking clarification w/r/to hCard and RFCs
2425/2426
To: "Microformats Discuss" <[email protected]>
Message-ID:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On 3/29/06, Kevin Marks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Do you mean services and protocols in the computing sense?
If so you should look into the DNS-SD specification for service
discovery, as this is a deployed and working one that builds on DNS.
That's what I've just been looking at. :)
I'm experimenting with it and trying to determine where a good
hand-off between the zeroconf layer and a web layer might be for
suites of related (but functionally distinct) services mostly
delivered over HTTP. Since DNS-level record keeping is rather more
heavyweight than registering and updating web resources, I'm thinking
a certain amount of restraint and stability on the DNS[-SD] side and
more flexibility on the web side might be best.
...which led to wondering what the best way to mark up directories of
computing services and protocols in [X]HTML might be.
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 05:48:55 -0800 (PST)
From: Tim White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Citation format straw proposal on the wiki
To: Microformats Discuss <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
--- Scott Reynen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mar 29, 2006, at 11:15 PM, Ross Singer wrote:
Explicitly stating what an item is a much sounder approach.
I agree. What if I want to cite a photograph and all I know about it
is the photographer's name and the title of the photograph?
You cite the photographer's name and title of the photograph.
<cite><span class="photographer">Ansel Adams</span>, <span
class="title">Siesta Lake</span></cite>
I understand the desire to capture "type" metadata - I wanted to
include it for the longest time. But - from a microformats point of
view - we have to keep two things in mind:
1) Humans first, machines second.
This means keeping everything visible, not trapped in metadata. If you
really want to note that it's a photo then include that:
<cite>Photo <span class="title">Siesta Lake</span> by <span class="fn
photography">Ansel Adams</span>.</cite>
2) "Adapted to current behaviors and usage patterns."
Microformats are suppose to be modeled on what people are currently
doing (80/20) on the web. I think of it in terms of the Everyman/
woman.
Capturing metadata isn't what is happening by the 80. Look at the
examples collected on the wiki, very little metadata if any.
(http://microformats.org/wiki/citation-examples -- look to the Implied
Schema section)
I think things like marc records, OpenURL, Bibtex, etc. are actually
*too* specific for MF. If the library community needs something to
replace the existing standards, it'd be great if it was based off of a
microformat, but it shouldn't be the MF.
~ Tim
<a href="http://www.tjameswhite.com";>www.tjameswhite.com</a>
<a href="http://www.spreadfirefox.com/?
q=affiliates&id=12227&t=1">Get Firefox!</a>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
End of microformats-discuss Digest, Vol 10, Issue 53
****************************************************
