Tantek Çelik wrote: > > A lot of the reasons you've raised might also apply to people who > > simply want to *implement* uf rather than get into the discussions > > about creating them in the first place. I wonder if one list could > > server that need as well as the newcomers? Just a thought. > > What about creating a new list for *new* microformats, and > keep microformats-discuss for general discussion, helping > newcomers and new implementers alike? > > Implementers that have actually published an implementation > should add themselves to the "implementations" wiki page and > *then* subscribe to the microformats-dev list.
Isn't microformats-dev for those writing code for parsers and such? I think *implement* in the above is about using uF, rather than implementing code that uses uF. I believe there have been recommendations for basically two new lists: microformats-use -- for (new) users of uF microformats-create -- for (new) creators of new uF These would potentially split off conversation from the three current lists microformats-dev -- for coders, developers (already exists) microformats-discuss -- general list (already exists) microformats-REST -- for REST related discussions Actually, I think the -use and -create lists could easily take over the context for ongoing discussions... They don't necessarily have to be for "newbies". The effective/innovative use of existing uF seems to be a discussion relatively separate from developing new ones. -j -- Joe Andrieu [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1 (805) 705-8651 _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
