I suppose I don't disagree with Maciej's point, but primarily take umbrage with the seemingly "random" classes that were going to be used as predefined values. "Copyright" was the biggest offender -- and a symptom of fflawed thinking -- given the established and widely used rel-license microformat.
If the standards groups did more of what you say they do and simply codify existing best or common practices, then I would have fewer concerns about their work. Indeed, I see a way for microformats to fit into and contribute to their work. To date, there seems little involvement (on the whole) from the standards groups in familiarizing themselves with our methodologies or work so far (please do prove me wrong if this is not the case). Furthermore, I heard that the W3C has a deadline of -- get this -- 2015 for their HTML5 work now that they've acquiesced to the WHATWG's work. By then shouldn't the Semantic Web have been built? :) In all seriousness, I think that there are some good ideas in HTML5 and XHTML2. The predefined classes that seemed arbitrarily decided upon were not among them; better would have been a request for input from the microformats community on which microformats should start making their way into the standards (if any should at all). It's great to see the progress being made in those domains, but I have to wonder whether it will be too foreign and too late by the time the standard is settled. What can be done in the meantime to make our work more relevant and practical while we wait for the next evolution of the web's markup languages? Chris On 5/23/07, Maciej Stachowiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On May 22, 2007, at 11:35 PM, Ciaran McNulty wrote: > On 5/23/07, Maciej Stachowiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I find it questionable to argue that microformats.org defining >> semantics for particular classes is generally good, but to assume >> that W3C or WHATWG defining them is ill-conceived. Note that HTML has >> always predefined some "rel" values, and this has not stopped >> microformats from defining other rel values, some of which will be >> folded back in to the HTML spec. > > To me the difference is that Microformats have a system for indicating > whether they are in use (although it's not used widely) in the > @profile mechanism, The fact that content does not use it and data extraction tools ignore it makes this a meaningless distinction in practice. > whereas anything 'hard coded' into the HTML spec will not be optional. I would once again draw the analogy to "rel". Anyway, I think most of the predefined class names in the HTML 5 spec were not really jusfied but I'd like to see things like the geo microformat possibly get folded into HTML over time. Regards, Maciej _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
-- Chris Messina Citizen Provocateur & Open Source Advocate-at-Large Work: http://citizenagency.com Blog: http://factoryjoe.com/blog Cell: 412 225-1051 Skype: factoryjoe This email is: [ ] bloggable [X] ask first [ ] private _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
