One reason to consider having both an implementation-level name and
an interface-level name: Mozilla has had multiple inquiries from
reporters in the mainstream media who wanted to cover microformats in
stories about the future of the Web browser, but they then later
backed out because they felt the term "microformats" would only
appeal to developers, and not the average reader.
Also, from a user interface design perspective, we really shouldn't
expose implementation-level terminology to end users.
-Alex
On Jun 28, 2007, at 4:35 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote:
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alex
Faaborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
this description would finish the sentence "features of Firefox 3
include support for offline Web applications, private browsing,
blocking malware, and __[user facing way of saying microformat
detection]__"
...data detection?
...semantic browsing?
...data browsing?
...semantic data detection?
...semantic data browsing?
...semantic data navigating?
"data extraction"
Though it strikes me as odd that we expend efforts trying to raise
"brand awareness" for microformats, then start top discuss renaming
them...
We should think long and hard about whether that's a good idea.
--
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
