2008/1/31, Manu Sporny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > The thought about porting the Dublin Core names over to Microformats was > mentioned on the uf-discuss list. Having a Dublin Core Microformat, may > be a solution that works for everybody.
--- we just have to be careful of creating a solution to a non-issue. Microformats model established publishing practices and solve simple problems. > The main disagreement seemed to be in DC's choice of class names... > This approach has two benefits: > > * It uses Microformat-like names. --- it might be microformat-like, and that is fine, but it doesn't need to be a microformat. It can be POSH or RDFa or eRDF, or others. Having a pseudo namespace DC-foobar has been discouraged before. > * It re-uses a vocabulary that is largely accepted in the web semantics > community. --- this is good we want to re-use not re-invent, but we also don't want to re-use whole-sale when possible, simply coping all of dublin core seems to be a solution to a non-problem. As new formats are created, we can look to existing formats like dublin core, we have done that with hAudio and attempted to reuse terms such as CONTRIBUTER, IMHO this is the proper way to proceed. Not a new dc-kitchen-sink-and-more approach. -brian -- brian suda http://suda.co.uk _______________________________________________ microformats-new mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
