> > http://planetmicroformats.com/ > > At the moment it is just an aggregation of several other sites based > on microformats. Any and all feedback is welcome. It is pretty crude > at the moment, but in the style of microformats it is better to get > something out and itterate on it rather than try to get it perfect the > first time.
Nice. I notice that apostrophes are coming out as question marks. Very good idea.
Good idea. Personally, I think I'd find it more useful if it were more like the other planet sites I've used, which tend to pull from individual sources rather than aggregators. The signal:noise ratio is just too low to actually read everything tagged "microformats" on any of the aggregator sites. I'd say keep microformats.org, lose everything else, and add some of the individual sources discovered through the aggregators. Peace, Scott
I'm also a little wary about the signal:noise deal. However, there don't seem to be too many currently, so I disagree for now. I'd suggest a two column layout ala <http://useit.com/>. The right column could go under the heading "Microformats Around the World" or something, might be a smaller type face, but otherwise containing pretty much the same information currently available: source, title, link, date published, and one or two lines. The right column could be dedicated for more permanent, vetted sources, similar to other planet sites. Typeface could be bigger, approaching the size currently there, with same information, but maybe a few more lines. At first, I suggest allowing the right column to be a bit more dominant, until we collect a satisfactory amount of high value sources. This strategy allows for an adaptive approach that amplifies the voices of all authors talking about microformats, yet also ensures that known, high-value authors are easily accessible. -Ben _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss