Ryan, This is an excellent description of the larger problem (that goes far beyond, and is perhaps independent of microformats).
I'd say this is worthy of an FAQ entry, as I can see this question being raised again (I believe Karl himself raised it some time ago before). Thanks, Tantek On 5/1/06 11:24 AM, "Ryan King" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On May 1, 2006, at 1:33 AM, Joe Andrieu wrote: >> The current microformat model is certainly better than POX, but I >> think it >> still leaves something to be desired. > > Certainly. Its not perfect, but it works. > >> This approach still requires that >> everyone uses the Microformats Approved(r) Anglo-biased namespace, >> even if >> they get to add their own term to the class. > > Worse, you have t use the English-based HTML, the English-based CSS, > the English-based HTTP and so on. > > Internationalization in protocols and formats is a big problem. Much > bigger than microformats. Maybe we'll be able to advance things in > microformats, even if only a little. > > I'm curious has anyone here had experience with Internationalizing a > data format or communication protocol? > >> To the extent we can enable other peoples and languages to "own" >> Microformats and participate as first class citizens, I suggest it >> would be >> a Good Thing(tm). > > I agree. Anything to increase neutrality and accessibility is a Good > Thing. > >> Couldn't we allow a mapping of any microformat into any >> language? This seems to be a simple solution for both humans and >> computers. > > You know, I don't think its really that simple. > > -ryan_______________________________________________ > microformats-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
