Re: [uf-discuss] W3HTML WG, HTML5, semantics, and so on
Thanks Maciej, HTML5 does have new elements, some of which are mainly for semantic purposes, but it does not at present have a copyright element. my bad, no idea where I got that idea from! The current proposal does have a predefined copyright class though. That would be it then. The HTML Working Group (and the WHATWG, which is continuing to operate in parallel) would welcome participation from microformats experts and advocates. Which was kind of what I was hinting at ;-) Mind you, I find the 100 or so emails a week on this mailing list sufficient to keep me occupied, so how to deal with 1000? :-) j ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] a[name] as machine data?
Better than a[name] would be a[href], assuming a relevent URI scheme exists: a href=geo:51.36,-0.05London, abbr title=United KingomUK/abbr/a (See: http://geouri.org/) Disadvantages would be: 1. Involves using a poorly supported URI scheme. People using browsers that don't support the scheme would get a link that doesn't do anything, or brings up a cryptic message. (This could be worked around with a combination of CSS and Javascript, but that seems a bit hackish to me.) 2. This requires there to always *be* such a URI scheme. There isn't a URI scheme for timestamps for instance. URI schemes cannot be quickly and easily registered. -Toby ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] W3HTML WG, HTML5, semantics, and so on
On May 11, 2007, at 3:15 PM, John Allsopp wrote: (abbr pattern problems, Clearly, there's a need for markup for the generic pattern of marking up a triple of data presented to humans, the microformat class and a normalized easy-to-parse representation of the data. HTML5 time addresses only one instance of this pattern. The problem with using abbr for this pattern is that title='' is intended to be human-readable and the pattern contaminates abbreviation data, so with microformats abbr is now less useful for e.g. non-microformat-aware but abbr-aware screen readers. The question that needs to be asked is: Will microformat producers and consumers be willing to migrate to a replacement of the abbr pattern if one is provided or will they continue to use abbr anyway for backwards compat? For example, should HTML 5 define a uf-data='' attribute as a common attribute such that the value of this attribute would be considered in preference over textContent by microformat consumers? Or should HTML 5 just mitigate the damage to the title attribute by defining a boolean attribute title-is-uf='' for flagging title='' attributes not meant for human consumption? Is it too late to get rid of this? abbr title='uf data'human data/abbr Would this be accepted by the uf community? span uf-data='uf data'human data/span If not, would this be backwards-compatible with uf consumers? span title='uf data' title-is-ufhuman data/span even with ufs no one uses profiles so HTML 5 should get rid of them ...) We already got rid of profile='' before the W3C adopted the draft. There may be some pressure to put it back due to theoretical considerations. This is part of the Descriptivist vs. Prescriptivist debate. It looks pretty obvious that microformat consumers experience more practical benefit when they ignore profile=''. -- Henri Sivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hsivonen.iki.fi/ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] a[name] as machine data?
Toby Inkster wrote: Better than a[name] would be a[href], assuming a relevent URI scheme exists: a href=geo:51.36,-0.05London, abbr title=United KingomUK/abbr/a (See: http://geouri.org/) Disadvantages would be: 1. Involves using a poorly supported URI scheme. People using browsers that don't support the scheme would get a link that doesn't do anything, or brings up a cryptic message. (This could be worked around with a combination of CSS and Javascript, but that seems a bit hackish to me.) 2. This requires there to always *be* such a URI scheme. There isn't a URI scheme for timestamps for instance. URI schemes cannot be quickly and easily registered. 3. This puts those links in the tab cycle for keyboard users, and on a page listing lots of events it would turn into tabbing hell. P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ Take it to the streets ... join the WaSP Street Team http://streetteam.webstandards.org/ __ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] hCite elevator pitch and my bibliography generator
On Mar 10, 2007, at 21:46, Henri Sivonen wrote: I needed a .bib-based bibliography generator for XHTML, so I wrote one with help from a friend who had developed a .bib parser. In case others are interested, I've published the source code. There's no documentation to speak of. http://hsivonen.iki.fi/thesis/bib4ht-0.9.tar.gz -- Henri Sivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hsivonen.iki.fi/ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Fwd: Twitter Is Now Even More Geeky
On 5/11/07, Ryan King [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 11, 2007, at 12:13 AM, Ben Buchanan wrote: And for the really geeky, we have a surprise: Twitter now fully supports microformats. Now that is pretty geektastic. How 'bout that! But what does that mean? Hmm, well it looks like all the are now hCards and the streams are hAtom. Nothing else is jumping out from a quick glance - can anyone spot anything more? XFN. All of the side bars use [rel=contact]. -ryan So yeah, it's hAtom + hCard + XFN. Pretty good, especially since we haven't seen too much hAtom pickup outside of a few WordPress blogs. They used my mockup as a guide: http://www.flickr.com/photos/factoryjoe/388495284/ Chris -- Chris Messina Citizen Provocateur Open Source Advocate-at-Large Work: http://citizenagency.com Blog: http://factoryjoe.com/blog Cell: 412 225-1051 Skype: factoryjoe This email is: [ ] bloggable[X] ask first [ ] private ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Fwd: Twitter Is Now Even More Geeky
On May 13, 2007, at 7:49 PM, Chris Messina wrote: XFN. All of the side bars use [rel=contact]. -ryan So yeah, it's hAtom + hCard + XFN. Pretty good, especially since we haven't seen too much hAtom pickup outside of a few WordPress blogs. Also rel=me on the URL links in personal pages, which is excellent going in to Internet Identity workshop this week. ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Regarding POSH and misuse of the microformats logo
On 5/7/07, Keith Alexander [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm of the opinion that Semantic HTML is a perfectly fine term for Semantic HTML, and I'm a little sceptical of the utility of a new acronym for it. If there's a problem with people still not understanding semantic html, either the arguments for it aren't being made clear enough and loud enough, or maybe the arguments simply don't chime with html authors ' perceptions of what they are doing. It's not like we weren't aware of the phrase semantic html when we went into discussions about POSH (obviously, as it's part of the new acronym). It isn't that the arguments aren't clear enough or loudly enough; we've had a good 4-5 years of tooting the proverbial semantic horn. The problem is that, in a lesser amount of time, microformats have totally taken off and captured people's imaginations whereas semantic HTML, the parent container of microformats, has relatively stagnated. Why is this? Why is the new microformats term more successful than semantic HTML? Well, right or wrong, we felt that 1) microformats have an aura of cool to them and 2) they have a pretty process for getting involved. Plenty of folks have been pushing semantic markup for some time; fewer think that semantic markup is cool. Therefore, for pure marketing and attention reasons, we decided that coming up with less of a mouthful would give us a chance to redefine what getting involved in the broader semantics movement would look like -- and would give us a way to package the concept as being on par with, or even as coming before, the microformats effort. Moreover, suggesting that people merely use semantic HTML is a bit misleading and open-ended, in that HTML itself has a poor vocabulary of semantic objects -- hence microformats and the work to codify some common classnames in HTML5 (I tend to disagree with HTML5's efforts though, and think that classnames should remain undefined, and let community adoption define their use and/or reuse.) POSH is the perfect anecdote to what I might call semantic malaise, where web developers and designers would love to go semantic, but apart from moving away from presentational elements and using tables for layouts, there hasn't been much beyond that that offers a way to level up, whereas with microformats, there's a clear process (think of hCard as being a level-80 microformat, etc). Anyway, love it or hate, use it or dismiss, I intend to base a lot of my upcoming promotional efforts on promoting POSH and microformats in tandem... with the limited success that semantic HTML has had in recent years and with the onslaught of closed web technologies like SilverLight, Apollo and JavaFX picking up steam, what's there to lose at this point? We've got to do something other than just hope that somehow, someday semantic will click in people's head as a glorious AHA and as the key to the future! Chris -- Chris Messina Citizen Provocateur Open Source Advocate-at-Large Work: http://citizenagency.com Blog: http://factoryjoe.com/blog Cell: 412 225-1051 Skype: factoryjoe This email is: [ ] bloggable[X] ask first [ ] private ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Regarding POSH and misuse of the microformats logo
On 5/13/07, Chris Messina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It isn't that the arguments aren't clear enough or loudly enough; we've had a good 4-5 years of tooting the proverbial semantic horn. The problem is that, in a lesser amount of time, microformats have totally taken off and captured people's imaginations whereas semantic HTML, the parent container of microformats, has relatively stagnated. What is the assumption of the stagnation of semantic HTML relative to microformats being based on? Were there any surveys conducted? People polled? Or is this just based on a feeling? Why is this? Why is the new microformats term more successful than semantic HTML? I don't think the term has anything to do with it at all. Microformats give quick, tangible returns upon implementation. When you implement hCard, you reuse data you've already got in your page and suddenly people can access and process that data in a systematic way. Conversely, whether you write semantic HTML or not, browsers are so forgiving that you'll hardly notice a thing right off the bat. That isn't to say that semantic HTML isn't important. It's just a universe apart from microformats in terms of immediate return on investment. The reason why microformats have taken off is because there are apps out there that directly consume them and won't work otherwise. The bane of semantic HTML has always been the forgiving browser. So long as apps aren't written to take full advantage of semantic markup, the problem will continue to exist. POSH or not. Because ultimately, what convinces a developer/designer is seeing the immediate result of their efforts. The paradox is in the fact that the creators of the apps that take advantage of semantic markup are the developers who need convincing themselves. Those familiar with semantic HTML know how to take advantage of it via CSS and JavaScript. Those unfamiliar don't know, and therefore don't see the need. This is why the process of evangelizing people in the use of semantic markup is so slow and painstaking. It's also why microformats can't be used as a comparison because the two are universes apart when it comes to the apps that consume them. Therefore, for pure marketing and attention reasons, we decided that coming up with less of a mouthful With all due respect, the idea that semantic HTML is a mouthful is downright patronizing, for those who already know of it, as well as for those whom we're trying to reach. suggesting that people merely use semantic HTML is a bit misleading and open-ended, in that HTML itself has a poor vocabulary of semantic objects But POSH /is/ semantic HTML, and is therefore open-ended, with a poor vocabulary of semantic objects. Stating that one should use POSH won't change any of that. If anything, throwing a new acronym into the mix, in my opinion, will only confuse people and fragment any ground the semantic markup movement has already made. That's because, not everyone who sees a new acronym will read up on it (as we're already swimming in a sea of them). POSH is the perfect anecdote to what I might call semantic malaise, where web developers and designers would love to go semantic, but apart from moving away from presentational elements and using tables for layouts, there hasn't been much beyond that that offers a way to level up, whereas with microformats, there's a clear process (think of hCard as being a level-80 microformat, etc). The very fact that web developers and designers have begun to move away from using presentational elements and tables for layout is due to the focused effort of people in the community targeting these particular issues. What's to keep the community from targeting the semantics of HTML? I don't think a new acronym is going to help do it (like I said before I think it's just going to cause confusion). If anything, it's just a question of more hard work on the part of the community to get the word out that there are semantics involved in creating markup, and that there are major benefits to using them. The key is in teaching designers/developers on how to take advantages of semantic markup. recent years and with the onslaught of closed web technologies like SilverLight, Apollo and JavaFX picking up steam, what's there to lose at this point? This is exactly where the confusion will emerge. Developers and designers will be under the impression that POSH is some sort of wizz-bang technology when it is just a rebranding of something that's been around since the stone age. What we'll lose is ground. A. -- Ara Pehlivanian Site: http://arapehlivanian.com/ Email GTalk: [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Twitter: http://twitter.com/ara_p/ LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/1/248/b84 Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=704015025 ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
