Andy Mabbett mumbled the following on 23/09/2006 12:52:
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Gazza
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
allowing/encouraging research of more esoteric or less frequently
used/published data types (species, moon/mars geolocations) on the Web.
Do you *really* think that species names are "esoteric"? <*boggle*>
Under a definition of only being used or known by a small group of
people, yes.
And you think that "Blackbird", "poodle", "T Rex", "potato", "French
Marigold", "Wisteria", "E. Coli", "HIV", "Rubella" or "human being" are
only used by a small group of people?
"Species names" tend to only be scientific, and therefore generally in
Latin. The list you propose above would be considered vernacular names
at best.
Considering that no agreed formal definition of "species" apparently
exists[1] then the usefulness of a supporting uF may be questionable.
[1]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species#Definitions_of_species>
--
Regards,
Gazza
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
