Or maybe it's not even a case of malice but of ignorance or laziness in determining if there were previous efforts in the calendaring problem space. We must remember that Google is the same company who implements their Talk in the jabber open protocol.
Maybe the Google Calendar guys are not as thourough in their due dilligence or maybe they considered hCal but discarded it for some reason. Maybe it would be a good idea to bring them into our discussion to have them shed us some light on the matter? I have no connection with Google so I don't know if I could reach anyone in the Calendar team but maybe someone in this mailing list could. It would be a good thing to have them more involved in hCal and uFs in general. Cheers, Antonio On 4/13/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > > On 4/12/06, Kevin Marks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Apr 12, 2006, at 11:27 PM, Sam Sethi wrote: > > > > > So who's the new Google ;-) > > > > depends who you ask: > > > > http://www.google.com/search&q=%22is+the+new+google%22 > > > Did you make that a broken link on purpose?! Because it was actually kind > of funny. (Google says the new Google is "Not Found" :-) ) > > > > says yahoo > > > > > http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=%22is+the+new+google%22 > > > > says 37 signals or maybe wikipedia > > > > > > > See ya > > > -- > Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. > > charles @ reptile.ca > supercanadian @ gmail.com > > developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ > ___________________________________________________________________________ > Make Television > http://maketelevision.com/ > _______________________________________________ > microformats-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss > > > -- Antonio Touriño Consultor en Tecnologías Web Brilliance Tech
_______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
