On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 20:57 +0100, André Luís wrote: > Ok just to clear it up, are you actually suggesting a new format? or > are you suggesting a best-practice for publishers to implement these > formats in such a way as to enable a more complete conversion to FOAF? >
Im not sure yet there are more than a few people already publishing this way so at the moment I would say that its just best practice or you could say I am just recognising a design pattern in our own community. A hFoaF format certainly looks desirable FoaF basically is just a machine readable homepage so it would seem natural to want to embed FoaF in html and make it represent an actual homepage too, last time I looked according to ping the semantic web[1] there are around a million FoaF documents out there so yes I think this should maybe be a format what do you think? [1] http://pingthesemanticweb.com/stats/namespaces.php Thanks Martin McEvoy > -- > André Luís > > On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 12:38 PM, Martin McEvoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 12:10 +0100, André Luís wrote: > >> I like the idea... basically you're just suggesting a way of putting > >> hcard+xfn+(hatom/xfolk) together in a simple way. Having a specific > >> format to aim for (and to call it) will surely help convergence in > >> implementations. > > > > Yes I guess that's the Idea. > > > > Martin McEvoy > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > microformats-discuss mailing list > microformats-discuss@microformats.org > http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
