Mike Schinkel wrote:
My opinion is this sounds like a great idea! Will you be doing the edit on
the current proposal?
yes, I intend to do before the end of this week.
I am surprised however at the number of people who felt "Currency
unit/denomination used identification" was important and it seems like an
edge case to me. I'm hoping that this become an optional aspect as opposed
to always required, and the same with amount, actually.
I think that you can change your vote (assuming your re-vote from the
same machine and cookies are one and haven't been erased).
Let me know. Otherwise, I think the simplest is that I remove your vote
from the final results.
Also, will the current spec worry about the other concerns so as not to
eliminate the possibility of including them later, or by asking am I just
removing the benefit of "focusing on the top 3" by asking?
I suggest the current spec focuses on the top 3. The future will be
moved to a "2.0" page. Any concern that some aspects of the 1.0 spec are
not be forward-compatible with 2.0 is relevant for 1.0.
Guillaume
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
