Nir, I think I know what's been bugging me about this thread. I as a consumer don't care about microformats. What I care about is content that's up-to-date and relevant. As a consumer, I want to know when we're getting together next week, not what's marked up with hCal.
The fundamental thing here is that uFs are a means to an end. They gain usefulness to the extent that they make things that I already want to do easy. My mom would never search for hcards (no matter the syntax) any more than she would search for images in a PNG format. It's a niche search that could be performed by a small group of technical people and it's no surprise that general-purpose search engines haven't made it a priority. Nor do I think such support would add much value for most people. -ml --- Nir Yariv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The point isn't whether it's hard for search engines to > support MFs > (obviously it isn't), the point is whether to wait for a > solution to > come from SE's side or implement it now in the publisher > side. [snip] > so far, > AFAIK, no major search engine except Technorati actually > supports > microformats. _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
