The problem with geo is that it is horrible to show in a UI
Mike: I think we should still try to support geo. Exposing the user
to geographic coordinates isn't ideal, but I think that it is
considerably better than hiding the action entirely.
I've been talking to Mike Beltzner (UX lead at Mozilla) about
microformats UI over the last week, and we are now considering a UI
similar to the one Pelle proposed (http://pelle.vox.nu/koncept/
locationBarMenu_pelle_small.jpg), in addition to the mouse cursor
change.
Regarding the mystery meat navigation concern: I think this is fair,
but I would say it is the web site's fault instead of the browser's
fault. I think web sites should be encouraged to add UI elements for
the user to click on to invoke an action on a microformat, similar to
the RSS icons and links that currently appear on web sites. The
reason we are changing the mouse cursor is because that's the only
part of the UI we control in the content area, we really can't start
injecting affordances.
We are also thinking about using the cursor change for other types of
content handling, like links with specific protocols (mailto:,
webcal:, etc.) and files that will either download or launch a
particular application. So this UI is not specific to microformats,
but content handling in general.
-Alex
On Jun 7, 2007, at 2:00 PM, Colin Barrett wrote:
It would be nice though, to be able to take something marked up
with geo and have it generate KML and get handed off to Google
Earth or to have it open up Google Maps (with the web-app content
handler stuff in the WHATWG webapp proposal).
-Colin
On Jun 7, 2007, at 11:04 AM, Mike Kaply wrote:
The problem with geo is that it is horrible to show in a UI. The
microformat only specifies a lat/long (no title) and there is no
guarantee there is anything interesting to show in the UI.
For a typical end user, geo just doesn't make a lot of sense. It's a
"geek" feature.
You will be able to add geo support similar to how Operator works,
with a user script.
Mike
On 6/7/07, Andy Mabbett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike
Kaply <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>> One last thing, are there any thoughts on which microformats
would be
>> supported by the Firefox UI? Would it be all of them? Maybe
it would
>> only be those that are specs and not drafts?
>
>Yes. At this point it will probably be hCard, hCalendar, Address
and
>maybe geo.
Why only "maybe" geo? I think there is a strong case for
including geo,
especially once KML and GPX export are available.
Where is this being discussed, and how is it best to make one's
views
known, or to "vote"?
--
Andy Mabbett
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
