On 4/9/07, David Janes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/9/07, Andy Mabbett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I contend that hAtom satisfies the requirements at: > > <http://microformats.org/wiki/process#Specifications> > > and should be made a full specification. Any objections?
--- yes, i have plenty of objections. We are currently at a version 0.2 before we go an make any sort of VOTING process or we should make it much more clear how to move from a draft to spec. Just because some one says "i don't see anything wrong" doesn't mean there isn't. Instead of selecting microformats that people think should move from draft, we should spend that time to define what that actually MEANS. -brian -- brian suda http://suda.co.uk _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
