On Sep 12, 2007, at 4:33 AM, Brian Suda wrote:
Quantity does not equate quality!
Right. I think we tend to get caught up in whether or not the numbers are convincing to our fellow community members, and lose track of the important question: whether or not the end result is convincingly useful for publishers. Most publishers don't care if the examples we collect are statistically significant; they only care if it looks useful for them. More examples helps with that goal, but there's not really quantifiable finish line. I suspect much of this problem could be resolved with better scope definitions. When someone says "these examples don't cover my needs," rather than collecting more examples to prove those needs are edge cases, we could be referring back to the scope definition and saying "sorry, your needs are outside the defined scope of this microformat." But that only works when the scope is very clearly defined in advance.
-- Scott Reynen MakeDataMakeSense.com _______________________________________________ microformats-new mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
