On 27/09/2007, Taylor Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >non-food based recipes in the long run. > > Taken in the strict sense whenever we find a recipe format, we'll know a lot > about the content. > > In "recipe for success" sense, recipe just means a set of steps. That's not > much more meaningful than a <ul> or <ol> list. I hope the group doesn't > allow that format to loose its flavor.
You're right. I think there is a strong desire to be quite focused about what exactly the recipe format should describe. I know I've made suggestions of marking up bombs, tutorials or how to knit scarves, but I can see how that could water down what is trying to be achieved. BUT, I still think that if the recipe format is done correctly, it won't necessarily exclude unusual uses. What happens if we do want to mark-up something more unusual as a guide as to how to make something non-edible? Is that a question that we're already declaring out of scope. I think that's my query. Should we scope this now so that research can be focused? What are our ultimate aims/problems to be solved? -- Frances Berriman http://fberriman.com _______________________________________________ microformats-new mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
