Re: [uf-discuss] Proposal: species
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes The problem before was how you were going about it; asking what people thought of the idea before you'd collected the supporting evidence. Poppycock: http://microformats.org/wiki/species-examples -- Andy Mabbett Say NO! to compulsory ID Cards: http://www.no2id.net/ Free Our Data: http://www.freeourdata.org.uk ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Proposal: species
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Colin Barrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes On Sep 23, 2006, at 11:42 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote: Human being is a reference to a species, and should be marked up as such on any page which includes it in a biological context. That's quite a bit of extra metadata -- IIRC the species tree has a height of about six or seven at its shortest. Is that really necessary on EVERY page mentioning a scientific name in a biological context? No. Who has suggested that it is? Could an automated tool be written to, when the text Homo sapiens is encountered, automatically mark it up into the correct species microformat? Yes - any find-and-replace tool can do that. is Genus Species a fairly unique way of identifying something? Of course. The whole point of taxonomy is to uniquely name things. Or are there collisions? No. I think questions like those will help your case -- sending dozens of links to this list will not. Then you'd better ask TC why he asked for them. -- Andy Mabbett Say NO! to compulsory ID Cards: http://www.no2id.net/ Free Our Data: http://www.freeourdata.org.uk ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Proposal: species
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes This is some good research Andy, and I hope they've been added to the examples page. P.S. It's a wiki - feel free. -- Andy Mabbett Say NO! to compulsory ID Cards: http://www.no2id.net/ Free Our Data: http://www.freeourdata.org.uk ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Proposal: species
Andy Mabbett mumbled the following on 24/09/2006 09:29: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes This is some good research Andy, and I hope they've been added to the examples page. P.S. It's a wiki - feel free. It's your idea, it's your proposal, it's your research, it's your opportunity to add it. -- Regards, Gazza ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
[uf-discuss] hCal: Lunar to Gregorian problem
As part of the many hats I wear, I've developed this page to be hCal compliant (at least according to Tails): http://www.surgeons.org/ScriptContent/CalendarAO.cfm?Section=Who_We_Are Neither the Technorati or Suda HCal conversion tools seem to play nice with the page, but I can at least confirm that I can extract meaningful hCal info using the Life Lint tool. The major problem is Outlook 2003 is coming up with the Lunar appointment issue. What am I missing ? Thanks Lawrence Meckan ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] hCal: Lunar to Gregorian problem
This is a known problem with Outlook[1]. The issue is that several OPTIONAL fields are Required in Outlook, namely DTSTAMP and UID. I had a look at your HTML and you seem to have them in there, so the next common reason things failing is TIDY. To use XSLT the input HTML file has to be XHTML. To do this, I pass the HTML through TIDY to make sure it is XML. When i pass your page through the w3c validator i get several errors[2]. So TIDY is probably cleaning it up and losing some of the invalid HTML where you have added Microformated properties. -brian [1] - http://microformats.org/wiki/icalendar-implementations#Importing_of_VEvents [2] - http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.surgeons.org%2FScriptContent%2FCalendarAO.cfm%3FSection%3DWho_We_Are On 9/24/06, Absalom Media [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As part of the many hats I wear, I've developed this page to be hCal compliant (at least according to Tails): http://www.surgeons.org/ScriptContent/CalendarAO.cfm?Section=Who_We_Are Neither the Technorati or Suda HCal conversion tools seem to play nice with the page, but I can at least confirm that I can extract meaningful hCal info using the Life Lint tool. The major problem is Outlook 2003 is coming up with the Lunar appointment issue. What am I missing ? Thanks Lawrence Meckan ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss -- brian suda http://suda.co.uk ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Proposal: species
On Sep 23, 2006, at 10:08 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Colin Barrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes On Sep 23, 2006, at 11:42 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote: Human being is a reference to a species, and should be marked up as such on any page which includes it in a biological context. That's quite a bit of extra metadata -- IIRC the species tree has a height of about six or seven at its shortest. Is that really necessary on EVERY page mentioning a scientific name in a biological context? No. Who has suggested that it is? Nobody -- I was unclear on the concept. The answer to the question is apparently: No. Could an automated tool be written to, when the text Homo sapiens is encountered, automatically mark it up into the correct species microformat? Yes - any find-and-replace tool can do that. is Genus Species a fairly unique way of identifying something? Of course. The whole point of taxonomy is to uniquely name things. OK, I didn't know that. Or are there collisions? I think questions like those will help your case -- sending dozens of links to this list will not. Then you'd better ask TC why he asked for them. I don't think he was asking for them to be posted to the list, but to be put on the examples page. I hope you're not coming away with the impression that people are attacking your idea or trying to shoot it down -- we're just trying to understand the who, what, where, why, when, how of this proposal -- not all of us are experts in Taxonomy -- evidenced earlier in this email :). I think the work you've been doing on this and the geo stuff is interesting -- unfortunately haven't had a chance to use them in my markup, but I am interested to see where things progress. -Colin ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Proposal: species
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Colin Barrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I think questions like those will help your case -- sending dozens of links to this list will not. Then you'd better ask TC why he asked for them. I don't think he was asking for them to be posted to the list, but to be put on the examples page. Immediately after citing, on this mailing, list an example relating to Geo, he said@: Andy, one thing that might help for the species discussion is if you could cite URLs to a site or sites with millions (or even thousands) of clearly obvious uses of species terminology (not just offhanded references like human being or plant) on pages. I hope you're not coming away with the impression that people are attacking your idea or trying to shoot it down -- we're just trying to understand the who, what, where, why, when, how of this proposal -- not all of us are experts in Taxonomy -- evidenced earlier in this email :). You and others maybe, but some certainly are attacking and shooting down, or at least trying to - and being disingenuous, if not dishonest, in doing so. -- Andy Mabbett Say NO! to compulsory ID Cards: http://www.no2id.net/ Free Our Data: http://www.freeourdata.org.uk ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
[uf-discuss] Dated currency examples?
In the currency-brainstorming [1] page, I see a few straw man proposals with dated currency. But I don't see anything in currency- examples [2] with dated currency. I think I understand the general idea, that currencies change value over time, but in what currently published HTML would such date markup be used? I'm sure there are examples of dated currency published on the web, but I suspect they are far under 20% of the currency values published. I'm interested in seeing this microformat completed and adopted and I'd hate to see unnecessary complexity prevent that from happening. [1] http://microformats.org/wiki/currency-brainstorming [2] http://microformats.org/wiki/currency-examples Peace, Scott ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
[uf-discuss] Criticism of Microformats
It seemed to me that a page linking to (non-hysterical) criticism of Microformats might be useful, so I created one: ttp://microformats.org/wiki/criticism as always, please feel free to add to and develop it (even if it is my idea, my proposal and my research!) -- Andy Mabbett Say NO! to compulsory ID Cards: http://www.no2id.net/ Free Our Data: http://www.freeourdata.org.uk ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Dated currency examples?
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes It could also be used to mark up current prices, on pages which are not likely to be updated read: It could also be used to mark up current (AT THE TIME OF WRITING) prices, on pages which are not likely to be updated (capitalised to emphasise correction). -- Andy Mabbett Say NO! to compulsory ID Cards: http://www.no2id.net/ Free Our Data: http://www.freeourdata.org.uk ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Proposal: species
On 9/24/06 10:08 AM, Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Colin Barrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I think questions like those will help your case -- sending dozens of links to this list will not. Then you'd better ask TC why he asked for them. I don't think he was asking for them to be posted to the list, but to be put on the examples page. Immediately after citing, on this mailing, list an example relating to Geo, he said@: In particular I noted a geo example already documented *on the wiki*. Andy, one thing that might help for the species discussion is if you could cite URLs to a site or sites with millions (or even thousands) of clearly obvious uses of species terminology (not just offhanded references like human being or plant) on pages. Colin (and others') interpretation is correct, citing on the *-examples page (and then perhaps referencing it in email) is what I was asking for, if implicitly. Thanks, Tantek ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Criticism of Microformats
On 9/24/06 12:01 PM, Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It seemed to me that a page linking to (non-hysterical) criticism of Microformats might be useful, so I created one: ttp://microformats.org/wiki/criticism This is certainly a reasonable approach, to openly confront criticisms and thus dispose of them. So far we have been using the FAQ as a general place to clarify/answer general criticisms/issues. http://microformats.org/wiki/faq as always, please feel free to add to and develop it (even if it is my idea, my proposal and my research!) Andy, regarding that in particular, clearly you've been quite prolific in your contributions to the microformats wiki and you are to be commended and recognized for your contributions (as should anyone who makes such substantial contributions to wiki pages). If you'd like, I encourage you to add a Contributors section to the pages you've created and list your name. Though we have not been consistent with this, check out citation-examples for example of Contributors section: http://microformats.org/wiki/citation-examples And feel free to add such a section to the currency-*, species-* etc. pages you've written up. I encourage other folks who have contributed to those pages to add their names as well to the list of contributors. Thanks, Tantek ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Dated currency examples?
On Sep 24, 2006, at 2:19 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Scott Reynen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes In the currency-brainstorming [1] page, I see a few straw man proposals with dated currency. No you don't; you see two real, albeit simplified for clarity, examples [3], [4], marked up according to the straw-man proposal (and subsequent suggested modifications). If I'm understanding this, the examples on the -brainstorming page are taken from real-world examples not yet detailed on the -examples page. What's not clear to me now is how it was decided which sections of those real-world examples are relevant to the currency microformat and which are out-of-scope. Dates look out-of-scope to me. If I'm right about this, then the straw man proposals should reflect this. But assuming I'm wrong, I think it's safe to also assume other people will be similarly wrong, and so it would be good to have a clear explanation of why dates are included while other loosely related information (e.g. tax, discounts, accepted forms of payment, etc.) are not, in the wiki where everyone can find it. If such an explanation is in there already, I've missed it. I think I understand the general idea, that currencies change value over time, but in what currently published HTML would such date markup be used? Any page which says used to be worth, was paid used to earn, then valued at, etc., etc. It could also be used to mark up current prices, on pages which are not likely to be updated when the value referred to changes (e.g. reviews [5]), or simply devalues through inflation (e.g. news stories [6], [7]). As I said before, my suspicion is that /relatively/ few pages on today's web are actually publishing a date for the currency values (which may or may not be the same as the publication date), but I'd be happy to see this suspicion of mine clearly contradicted by /more/ specific examples in the currency-examples page. I'm sure there are examples of dated currency published on the web, but I suspect they are far under 20% of the currency values published. So? When fewer people are publishing something, we have a smaller pool of potential adopters of a microformat. Microformats face a chicken-egg problem because publishers are hesitant to start publishing something with few tools to consume it, and tool developers are hesitant to develop new tools to consume microformat data that isn't yet widely published. And without both publishers and tool developers using a microformat, it's not really helping anyone. For this reason, we first target types of data that are being widely published, to maximize the likelihood of success for a specific microformat. This is my take on what many refer to as simply the 80/20 rule, as mentioned on the process page in the *-brainstorming section. I'm sure someone else can explain it better, as I wasn't around when this rough number system was adopted as a decision-making standard in this community. I mention the (suspected) lack of published dated currency because I'd like to see a currency microformat adopted, and I suspect removing the dates from an initial version would make that adoption more likely. I'm interested in seeing this microformat completed and adopted and I'd hate to see unnecessary complexity prevent that from happening. There is absolutely no reason why it shouldn't be completed and adopted; there is no unnecessary complexity. I think you might be underestimating the difficulty of convincing people to use microformats. But I'll be happy to find I was wrong come adoption time. Peace, Scott ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
[uf-discuss] hcard - role or title?
Is their a semantic difference between the use of title or role to describe the position within the organisation for a hcard? Relevant links: http://microformats.org/wiki/hresume#Job_Titles http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard#Property_List http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard-examples#3.5.2_ROLE_Type_Definition http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard-examples#3.5.1_TITLE_Type_Definition -- Regards, Gazza ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Criticism of Microformats
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tantek Çelik [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes On 9/24/06 12:01 PM, Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It seemed to me that a page linking to (non-hysterical) criticism of Microformats might be useful, so I created one: ttp://microformats.org/wiki/criticism This is certainly a reasonable approach, to openly confront criticisms and thus dispose of them. You seem to discount the possibility of recognising, accepting and addressing them. So far we have been using the FAQ as a general place to clarify/answer general criticisms/issues. If people are discussing microformats elsewhere, then they're not necessarily going to see the FAQ (at least not unless somebody goes to that place and pints them at it) as always, please feel free to add to and develop it (even if it is my idea, my proposal and my research!) Andy, regarding that in particular, clearly you've been quite prolific in your contributions to the microformats wiki and you are to be commended and recognized for your contributions (as should anyone who makes such substantial contributions to wiki pages). If you'd like, I encourage you to add a Contributors section to the pages you've created and list your name. Thank you; I wasn't seeking self-glorification, merely quoting something said elsewhere in this list. Perhaps we need a microformat to identify irony ;-) -- Andy Mabbett Say NO! to compulsory ID Cards: http://www.no2id.net/ Free Our Data: http://www.freeourdata.org.uk ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] hcard - role or title?
title in hCard/vCard is well understood to mean job/organization title and is commonly used. role is less well understood and less used in both existing vCard applications and content. While role may have a lot of potential, it makes sense to use title as it is understood, while role is figured out. Thanks, Tantek On 9/24/06 2:04 PM, Gazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is their a semantic difference between the use of title or role to describe the position within the organisation for a hcard? Relevant links: http://microformats.org/wiki/hresume#Job_Titles http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard#Property_List http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard-examples#3.5.2_ROLE_Type_Definition http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard-examples#3.5.1_TITLE_Type_Definition ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Dated currency examples?
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Scott Reynen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes On Sep 24, 2006, at 2:19 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Scott Reynen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes In the currency-brainstorming [1] page, I see a few straw man proposals with dated currency. No you don't; you see two real, albeit simplified for clarity, examples [3], [4], marked up according to the straw-man proposal (and subsequent suggested modifications). If I'm understanding this, the examples on the -brainstorming page are taken from real-world examples not yet detailed on the -examples page. Some are; some are (IIRC) on that page , some are hypothetical (and need be no more, being very basic - we don't really need a real word example to know that $5 occurs!). What's not clear to me now is how it was decided which sections of those real-world examples are relevant to the currency microformat and which are out-of-scope. Dates look out-of-scope to me. There is no scope, only a straw-man-scope, and they're within that (for good reason). If I'm right about this, then the straw man proposals should reflect this. But assuming I'm wrong, I think it's safe to also assume other people will be similarly wrong, and so it would be good to have a clear explanation of why dates are included while other loosely related information (e.g. tax, discounts, accepted forms of payment, etc.) are not Because the date has direct relevance to the real-world value of the figure displayed; the others do not. Granted, all the other cases you cite, could be made into microformats, which include a currency microformat component. , in the wiki where everyone can find it. If such an explanation is in there already, I've missed it. Feel free. I think I understand the general idea, that currencies change value over time, but in what currently published HTML would such date markup be used? Any page which says used to be worth, was paid used to earn, then valued at, etc., etc. It could also be used to mark up current prices, on pages which are not likely to be updated when the value referred to changes (e.g. reviews [5]), or simply devalues through inflation (e.g. news stories [6], [7]). As I said before, my suspicion is that /relatively/ few pages on today's web are actually publishing a date for the currency values (which may or may not be the same as the publication date), but I'd be happy to see this suspicion of mine clearly contradicted by /more/ specific examples in the currency-examples page. Feel free. I'm sure there are examples of dated currency published on the web, but I suspect they are far under 20% of the currency values published. So? When fewer people are publishing something, we have a smaller pool of potential adopters of a microformat. Microformats face a chicken-egg problem because publishers are hesitant to start publishing something with few tools to consume it, and tool developers are hesitant to develop new tools to consume microformat data that isn't yet widely published. But in this case, with a date component, booth are effectively getting something for nothing. And without both publishers and tool developers using a microformat, it's not really helping anyone. For this reason, we first target types of data that are being widely published, to maximize the likelihood of success for a specific microformat. This is my take on what many refer to as simply the 80/20 rule, as mentioned on the process page in the *-brainstorming section. I'm sure someone else can explain it better, as I wasn't around when this rough number system was adopted as a decision-making standard in this community. I mention the (suspected) lack of published dated currency because I'd like to see a currency microformat adopted, and I suspect removing the dates from an initial version would make that adoption more likely. I've seen no evidence, and I'm not convinced by your argument, that that is the case. I'm interested in seeing this microformat completed and adopted and I'd hate to see unnecessary complexity prevent that from happening. There is absolutely no reason why it shouldn't be completed and adopted; there is no unnecessary complexity. I think you might be underestimating the difficulty of convincing people to use microformats. But I'll be happy to find I was wrong come adoption time. Who will be dissuaded, by the inclusion of an *optional* component? -- Andy Mabbett Say NO! to compulsory ID Cards: http://www.no2id.net/ Free Our Data: http://www.freeourdata.org.uk ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Criticism of Microformats
On 9/24/06 2:05 PM, Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tantek Çelik [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes On 9/24/06 12:01 PM, Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It seemed to me that a page linking to (non-hysterical) criticism of Microformats might be useful, so I created one: ttp://microformats.org/wiki/criticism This is certainly a reasonable approach, to openly confront criticisms and thus dispose of them. You seem to discount the possibility of recognising, accepting and addressing them. Apologies, dispose as in disposition of comments is W3C jargon (at least that's where I learned it) for accepting and addressing comments/criticism. http://google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.w3.org+%22Disposition+of+Comments%22 So no, not discounting at all, rather quite the opposite. So far we have been using the FAQ as a general place to clarify/answer general criticisms/issues. If people are discussing microformats elsewhere, then they're not necessarily going to see the FAQ (at least not unless somebody goes to that place and pints them at it) That's ok. As long as the community deals with it and publishes it, the information will eventually be found. We can make it much easier to find and browse on microformats.org rather than scattered across random forums which may not even have decent permalinks. That being said it doesn't hurt to at least post links in those other fora to the dispositions of comments/criticisms/issues on microformats.org. as always, please feel free to add to and develop it (even if it is my idea, my proposal and my research!) Andy, regarding that in particular, clearly you've been quite prolific in your contributions to the microformats wiki and you are to be commended and recognized for your contributions (as should anyone who makes such substantial contributions to wiki pages). If you'd like, I encourage you to add a Contributors section to the pages you've created and list your name. Thank you; I wasn't seeking self-glorification, I wasn't implying that you were. I meant what I said, recognition is valid. merely quoting something said elsewhere in this list. Perhaps we need a microformat to identify irony ;-) Perhaps, though we really should start with a smiley-examples page just to make sure we first document existing practice ;) I meant it about Contributors sections. I repeat the encouragement for you to add them. Thanks, Tantek ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
[uf-discuss] use existing before proposing new
[fork] On 9/24/06 1:38 PM, Scott Reynen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think you might be underestimating the difficulty of convincing people to use microformats. But I'll be happy to find I was wrong come adoption time. Scott, this is an excellent point, and something I have *often* found in standards communities. I would even say that the majority of folks working on standards *greatly* underestimate the barriers to adoption that they are either face, or, worse, creating by making standards more complicated than the 80/20 market really cares to even bother with. I've been brainstorming ideas about how to make more folks working on standards (in particular, microformats) aware of these barriers to adoption, and have come up with very few ideas. One in particular though has been stuck in my head, and this is as good a time as any to bring it up (I don't think I brought it up before, but I've privately bounced it off a few folks). Change the process such that: Before proposing even the assumed *need* for a microformat, what if we require that the proposer *first* demonstrate an understanding of current microformats by requiring that they use/adopt existing microformats on their web pages whereever applicable (e.g. hCards for people/orgs, hCalendar for events etc.), and only *after* they've actually used existing microformats as such, permit the proposal of new microformats? IMHO this would cut down on theoretical microformats proposals, and at the same time would help provide first-hand microformats authoring experience/expertise to those that would otherwise be proposing microformats, so they understand exactly what they would be asking of others. Thoughts? Tantek ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Dated currency examples?
On 9/24/06 2:13 PM, Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Who will be dissuaded, by the inclusion of an *optional* component? Because if it is unnecessary for the 80/20, we leave it out. Otherwise there is a ballooning of optional components. In terms of date, I suggest you look to the context of the document itself (or perhaps surrounding blog post) for date time information. E.g. consider marking up a context with hAtom inside which the currency would be implied to be current according to the published datetime. I would assert this covers far more than the 80/20 case but more like the 99+% case (ecommerce sites etc.). Thanks, Tantek ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] use existing before proposing new
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tantek Çelik [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Before proposing even the assumed *need* for a microformat, what if we require that the proposer *first* demonstrate an understanding of current microformats by requiring that they use/adopt existing microformats on their web pages whereever applicable (e.g. hCards for people/orgs, hCalendar for events etc.), and only *after* they've actually used existing microformats as such, permit the proposal of new microformats? In my case, I came here some months ago, lurked, posted a few minor comments and lots of questions; marked up some test microformats, asked for feedback, applied fixes, iterated, marked-up a quantity of real data, proposed two simple replications/ adaptations of an existing format, and ONLY THEN proposed the format (species), the desire for which had first led me to look for something like microformats in the first place. That said, you can't stop someone from saying Hey, I think we need a microformat for X; doubly so in a supposedly *open* standards community. -- Andy Mabbett Say NO! to compulsory ID Cards: http://www.no2id.net/ Free Our Data: http://www.freeourdata.org.uk ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Dated currency examples?
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tantek Çelik [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Who will be dissuaded, by the inclusion of an *optional* component? Because if it is unnecessary for the 80/20, we leave it out. The question was who. Otherwise there is a ballooning of optional components. That's absurd, and a very weak and illogical form of argument. Nobody is suggesting any more than one optional component. You've invented the rest. In terms of date, I suggest you look to the context of the document itself (or perhaps surrounding blog post) for date time information. E.g. consider marking up a context with hAtom inside which the currency would be implied to be current according to the published datetime. I would assert this covers far more than the 80/20 case but more like the 99+% case (ecommerce sites etc.). And is there, or is there ever likely to be an hAtom parser which converts historical to current values? How will you get an hAtom published date from a page of prose which includes a paragraph (values invented): In 1920 an average house cost £300, in 1930 it cost $500, in 1960 it cost £2,500, in 1990, £55,000 but today it costs £150,000. and even if you do, what use will it be? Finally, I thought the community wanted evidence, not assertions? Or is that a one-way thing? -- Andy Mabbett Say NO! to compulsory ID Cards: http://www.no2id.net/ Free Our Data: http://www.freeourdata.org.uk ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Criticism of Microformats
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tantek Çelik [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I meant it about Contributors sections. I repeat the encouragement for you to add them. Done. Thank you again. -- Andy Mabbett Say NO! to compulsory ID Cards: http://www.no2id.net/ Free Our Data: http://www.freeourdata.org.uk ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] use existing before proposing new
On 9/24/06 2:38 PM, Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tantek Çelik [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Before proposing even the assumed *need* for a microformat, what if we require that the proposer *first* demonstrate an understanding of current microformats by requiring that they use/adopt existing microformats on their web pages whereever applicable (e.g. hCards for people/orgs, hCalendar for events etc.), and only *after* they've actually used existing microformats as such, permit the proposal of new microformats? In my case, Just to be clear Andy, my note was not directed at you in particular. It's been something I've been thinking about a lot and Scott reminded me. I came here some months ago, lurked, posted a few minor comments and lots of questions; marked up some test microformats, asked for feedback, applied fixes, iterated, marked-up a quantity of real data, Cool. Just to be sure - did you add the pages you marked up to the Examples in the Wild sections of the respective specifications? I'm thinking were we to adopt this modification to the process that that (adding links to examples in the wild to the wiki) would be the concrete measurable aspect of this requirement. proposed two simple replications/ adaptations of an existing format, and ONLY THEN proposed the format (species), the desire for which had first led me to look for something like microformats in the first place. Excellent. Did you find it to be useful/educational to go through the process of marking up and publishing real data with existing microformats? That said, you can't stop someone from saying Hey, I think we need a microformat for X; doubly so in a supposedly *open* standards community. Of course not, but we can help steer people towards being more effective with their microformat ideas and proposals, which is a primary goal of the process. Thanks, Tantek ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Dated currency examples?
On 9/24/06 3:15 PM, Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Otherwise there is a ballooning of optional components. That's absurd, and a very weak and illogical form of argument. Nobody is suggesting any more than one optional component. You've invented the rest. Even one additional optional component adds complexity. This is unfortunately from experience (not just mine) with *LOTS* of standards development. In terms of date, I suggest you look to the context of the document itself (or perhaps surrounding blog post) for date time information. E.g. consider marking up a context with hAtom inside which the currency would be implied to be current according to the published datetime. I would assert this covers far more than the 80/20 case but more like the 99+% case (ecommerce sites etc.). And is there, or is there ever likely to be an hAtom parser which converts historical to current values? Not the point. The point is that current values are 99+% case (we can count/cite pages on eBay, Amazon etc. if you like) which are easily represented by using hAtom + currency, thus relegating purely historical references to the 20% case which we reject for v1 of a microformat. Finally, I thought the community wanted evidence, not assertions? Are you seriously arguing that there are more than 20% references to explicit *historical* currency amounts in contrast to all the e-commerce sites out there which reference current values as of the date-time of the publication of the page? Tantek ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] use existing before proposing new
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tantek Çelik [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I came here some months ago, lurked, posted a few minor comments and lots of questions; marked up some test microformats, asked for feedback, applied fixes, iterated, marked-up a quantity of real data, Cool. Just to be sure - did you add the pages you marked up to the Examples in the Wild sections of the respective specifications? Yes (I've not done so for the (relatively recent) hAtom pages, yet, because I want to do further work and testing on it, first). I'm thinking were we to adopt this modification to the process that that (adding links to examples in the wild to the wiki) would be the concrete measurable aspect of this requirement. It would measure that the page has microformats, it would not measure that they were put there by the person claiming so. proposed two simple replications/ adaptations of an existing format, and ONLY THEN proposed the format (species), the desire for which had first led me to look for something like microformats in the first place. Excellent. Did you find it to be useful/educational to go through the process of marking up and publishing real data with existing microformats? Of course. That said, you can't stop someone from saying Hey, I think we need a microformat for X; doubly so in a supposedly *open* standards community. Of course not, but we can help steer people towards being more effective with their microformat ideas and proposals, which is a primary goal of the process. Then simply *suggest* that people use microformats before proposing them, as part of the process. -- Andy Mabbett Say NO! to compulsory ID Cards: http://www.no2id.net/ Free Our Data: http://www.freeourdata.org.uk ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Dated currency examples?
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tantek Çelik [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes The point is that current values are 99+% case (we can count/cite pages on eBay, Amazon etc. if you like) which are easily represented by using hAtom + currency, thus relegating purely historical references to the 20% case which we reject for v1 of a microformat. [...] Are you seriously arguing that there are more than 20% references to explicit *historical* currency amounts in contrast to all the e- commerce sites out there which reference current values as of the date-time of the publication of the page? No; but then again neither am I only interested in serving the hypothetical interests of mega-corporations. (Organisations who, for all we know, might be strongly against allowing easy currency conversion on pages they've tailored to - and discounted for - a specific locale). -- Andy Mabbett Say NO! to compulsory ID Cards: http://www.no2id.net/ Free Our Data: http://www.freeourdata.org.uk ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Dated currency examples?
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tantek Çelik [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes date How about this as a model: date is an optional component of the currency microformat. When date is present, parsers may disregard it. When parsers understand date, and none is present, they may infer the date from any containing element (e.g. review, hAtom entry, hResume-hCalendar, etc.) ? -- Andy Mabbett Say NO! to compulsory ID Cards: http://www.no2id.net/ Free Our Data: http://www.freeourdata.org.uk ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
RE: [uf-discuss] Dated currency examples?
Andy Mabbett writes No; but then again neither am I only interested in serving the hypothetical interests of mega-corporations. (Organisations who, for all we know, might be strongly against allowing easy currency conversion on pages they've tailored to - and discounted for - a specific locale). Andy, Your political bias is not an appropriate foundation for discussing microformats. The web exists. Web pages exists. Microformats are designed to support the majority (actually 80%) of the existing use cases on the web. Pave the cow paths. It isn't relevant how those web pages came to be, who built them, or who profits from them. If your argument is that mega-corporations are bad and therefore we shouldn't support mega-corporations, then I encourage you to find a political venue for your interests instead of a technical one. -j -- Joe Andrieu [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1 (805) 705-8651 ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Dated currency examples?
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tantek Çelik [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Are you seriously arguing that there are more than 20% references to explicit *historical* currency amounts in contrast to all the e- commerce sites out there which reference current values as of the date-time of the publication of the page? P.S. Are you seriously arguing that 20% of resumes include publications? That 20% of reviews include a license? That 20% of addresses include an extended-address, or post box? -- Andy Mabbett Say NO! to compulsory ID Cards: http://www.no2id.net/ Free Our Data: http://www.freeourdata.org.uk ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Dated currency examples?
On Sep 24, 2006, at 7:29 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tantek Çelik [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes date How about this as a model: date is an optional component of the currency microformat. When date is present, parsers may disregard it. When parsers understand date, and none is present, they may infer the date from any containing element (e.g. review, hAtom entry, hResume-hCalendar, etc.) ? the problem I see with logic like the above is the one that comes up semi-frequently when trying to address issues like this -- that a parser for X must then understand all other current (and future) microformats in order to extract the proper meaning from the markup. If you have a parser that understands hatom and hcalendar and then hreview comes along it presents the case of ether (a) the parser not extracting the meaning because it doesn't yet support the newer format or (b) the page changing meaning to the outside world as parsers get upgraded to see the new context. I would also worry about being too ambitious with applying context clues (e.g. a blog post stating i remember buying a comic book for 10¢ and then applying the post date to the value) but that may be more of an authoring issue that could be worked through with more discussion then my first concern. -- [ Chris Casciano ] [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] [ http://placenamehere.com ] ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Dated currency examples?
On 9/24/06 7:25 PM, Chris Casciano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sep 24, 2006, at 7:29 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tantek Çelik [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes date How about this as a model: date is an optional component of the currency microformat. When date is present, parsers may disregard it. When parsers understand date, and none is present, they may infer the date from any containing element (e.g. review, hAtom entry, hResume-hCalendar, etc.) ? the problem I see with logic like the above is the one that comes up semi-frequently when trying to address issues like this -- that a parser for X must then understand all other current (and future) microformats in order to extract the proper meaning from the markup. This is fallacious argument. Using a building block != using all building blocks. In addition, the complexity/waste is far worse for the alternative, that is a set of silo formats with duplicated functionality rather than using sets of simple, small, modular formats together which is what we're trying to do with microformats. In addition, there is another reason for keeping the dated version of currencies separate. Solve a simpler problem first. The problem of just representing a current currency value (per the context) is simpler than representing a currency value at a specific date in history. Another thought is that the space of historical data is probably a more relevant way to discuss this than just currency. People assert all kinds of facts about the past (not just currency), and rather than having something that is specific to currency, perhaps this implies a need for a simpler history microformat which can then contain any kind of data which is asserted to be true/accurate as of that point in history. Let's think modular here folks. Thanks, Tantek ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
