Not sure this is a good thing since, from the article, it looks like
they're already inventing their own.
If they're simply using more semantics in their HTML, that's great!
BUT, that doesn't mean they're microformats without going through
community process.
So, I support their adoption of the principles and practices of
microformats, but am reluctant to call their work "microformats"
without also implementing the open, research-driven development process.
Chris
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 26, 2007, at 1:22 PM, Chris Saad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2228011,00.asp
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "DataPortability Workgroup" group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/dataportability?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
