Re: [uf-discuss] schema.org, microformats.org, hRecipe
I just want to remind people that Thomas was an unsung hero that worked his ass off to get the hrecipe format into a workable format. He collaborated with the Food Network and together they were able to publish the microformat. I remember coming across an issue with the hreview on Yahoo! Tech around 2006. It wasn't specifically itemscope, rather the desire to reference content from another section of the page. For example, we had various hreviews on a product page, but we had trouble referencing the product name without including it within each review's container. Itemscope wasn't an option at that time and I don't think it would have solved the issue. We tried to reference the product name but ended up adding the product name to each review via a hidden element. It was an ugly solution, but better than having thousands of reviews for anonymous products. That being said, I do believe people would have used itemscope if it was available from the beginning of microformats. But hindsight is 20/20. Ted On 7/1/11 2:14 PM, thomas lörtsch tho...@stray.net wrote: Tantek, since you already contributed to this thread, would you care to comment on my original question? Or can you point me to a wiki page where it is answered already? Besides browsing through the microformats.org site I also fulltext-searched it for Google but couldn't find anything relevant wrt my initial question (see the first mail in this thread). Which is odd. Cheers Thomas PS: And can you elaborate (or point me to a wiki page) how email archives on the web are NOT discoverable? On Jun 30, 2011, at 8:51 PM, Tantek Çelik wrote: The point is to capture specific issues rather than have a discussion - a discussion where nothing is recorded on the wiki is nearly worthless and may as well have not happened. If it doesn't get captured on a discoverable URL, it might as well not exist (and no, email archives are NOT discoverable). I don't remember anyone asking for anything like itemscope in microformats. This list or IRC (preferably) is a good place to start with questions, but if there is an answer it should be captured by the author in an FAQ either specific to a microformat *-faq page, or in general on: http://microformats.org/wiki/faq If there is a specific known issue to report for a specific microformat, add it to the *-issues page for that microformat. If there is a specific known issue that applies to several microformats (eg class microformats) add it to: http://microformats.org/wiki/issues The goal is to *minimize* thrash / going in circles on email (a common problem in standards related communities), and instead to capture and grow our collective knowledge and understanding on the wiki. Thanks, Tantek -Original Message- From: thomas lörtsch tho...@stray.net Sender: microformats-discuss-boun...@microformats.org Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 16:24:40 To: Microformats Discussmicroformats-discuss@microformats.org Reply-To: Microformats Discuss microformats-discuss@microformats.org Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] schema.org, microformats.org, hRecipe On Jun 29, 2011, at 5:05 PM, Stephen Paul Weber wrote: I remember the itemscope thing coming up. Consensus seemed to be that is solved by root class names, but that was so long ago I forget. I assume that people created wiki pages documenting this? If not, why not? Microformats.org is a wiki first, and the mailing lists and IRC just facilitate the wiki. IMHO, if it's not documented on the wiki, then it's just a discussion. Well, just a discussion wouldn't be a bad start. Or do you suggest that I open a wiki page on my question? Thomas °|´ in pursuit of the gestalt of it all / ^^^ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss °|´ in pursuit of the gestalt of it all / ^^^ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] schema.org, microformats.org, hRecipe
2011/7/1 thomas lörtsch tho...@stray.net: Tantek, since you already contributed to this thread, would you care to comment on my original question? Or can you point me to a wiki page where it is answered already? Ok will do. Besides browsing through the microformats.org site I also fulltext-searched it for Google but couldn't find anything relevant wrt my initial question (see the first mail in this thread). Which is odd. Indeed. PS: And can you elaborate (or point me to a wiki page) how email archives on the web are NOT discoverable? See above where you wrote: fulltext-searched it for Google but couldn't find anything relevant wrt my initial question (see the first mail in this thread). Which is odd. Your statement demonstrates my point about how email archives on the web are NOT discoverable. Now, as to your specific questions: 2011/6/29 thomas lörtsch tho...@stray.net: Hi all, I don't want to discuss the schema.org effort in general here, although there surely is a lot to discuss about it. I've got about a half-dozen or so blog posts in progress strongly critiquing and debunking schema.org as an effort - there are so many things wrong with it that it's taking me a while to collect / itemize them all. I'm also trying to focus my longer analyses on what to do right rather than what schema.org has done wrong. E.g.: http://tantek.com/2011/168/b1/practices-good-open-web-standards-development If you want to discuss/critique schema.org in particular, check out: irc://irc.freenode.net/schema where the minutes for the SemTech meetup were taken. My question is how collaboration between Google.com and microformats.org is organized, where it's taking place, In short: on the wiki, irc channel, and a little on the *-discuss and *-new mailing lists, like with anybody else. who is involved. The SemTech transcript mentioned both hReview-aggregate and hRecipe as you quoted. If you google for both of those: hReview-aggregate - first result: http://microformats.org/wiki/hreview-aggregate which says right at the top: Editor Kavi Goel, Google. and: Authors/Contributers (alphabetical) ... Othar Hansson, Google hRecipe - first result: http://microformats.org/wiki/hrecipe Searching that page for Google you quickly find: Google. Launched 24th February, 2011, Recipe View search results from Google are powered by hRecipe marked-up snippets. where Recipe View links to: http://www.google.com/landing/recipes/ which doesn't say who specifically is involved. Googling for: hrecipe google 3rd result is: http://microformats.org/2011/02/24/google-launches-microformat-powered-recipe-search wherein the 2nd link is: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/02/slice-and-dice-your-recipe-search.html which if you read to the end of the post is: Posted by Kavi Goel, Product Manager I'm sure there is and has always been some informal exchange, Actually I personally try to minimize informal person-to-person exchanges regarding microformats as they doesn't scale well for the community. Kavi has contacted me personally in the past and I've done my best to direct him to ask his questions etc. on the IRC channel and document his research / requirements / brainstorms publicly on the wiki, emphasizing that it's ok to have incomplete/partial work on the wiki while figuring things out. since people happen to know each other, meet at confernces or other events etc, Those are all true of course. However even in those cases, it's best to have those discussion in open areas such as the IRC channel or the wiki for everyone's benefit. and of course that's fine with me. That's generous of you, however I do think it is reasonable to request that folks in the microformats community prefer community forums (IRC, wiki, mailing list if necessary) to private one-on-one or small group interactions (with perhaps the one exception of just wanting to bounce crazy/uncertain/raw ideas off of friends to sanity-check them before sharing more widely/publicly). I was wondering though when I read the following statement in a transcript of the Schema.org BOF at SemTech 2011 http://www.w3.org/2011/06/semtech-bof-notes.html: [...] Kevin Marks: Microformats says have a discussion first. You did that with hRecipe, so I'm surprsed to see you didnt go through that here. That'a the difference in phsilophy Tantek Çelik: Google (Kavi in particular!) successfully worked with the open community on both hReview-aggregate and hRecipe - openly. [...] Kevin Marks: hRecipe was a great example of how Google can do this. [...] This sounds like quite some conversations, discussions and thorough work. Now I wonder: how specifically did that great and successfull work with the open community go? Where did it take place? On the wiki (as documented above) and mailing lists. A simple microformats.org site-specific search of Kavi Goel gives you plenty:
Re: [uf-discuss] schema.org, microformats.org, hRecipe
Tantek, since you already contributed to this thread, would you care to comment on my original question? Or can you point me to a wiki page where it is answered already? Besides browsing through the microformats.org site I also fulltext-searched it for Google but couldn't find anything relevant wrt my initial question (see the first mail in this thread). Which is odd. Cheers Thomas PS: And can you elaborate (or point me to a wiki page) how email archives on the web are NOT discoverable? On Jun 30, 2011, at 8:51 PM, Tantek Çelik wrote: The point is to capture specific issues rather than have a discussion - a discussion where nothing is recorded on the wiki is nearly worthless and may as well have not happened. If it doesn't get captured on a discoverable URL, it might as well not exist (and no, email archives are NOT discoverable). I don't remember anyone asking for anything like itemscope in microformats. This list or IRC (preferably) is a good place to start with questions, but if there is an answer it should be captured by the author in an FAQ either specific to a microformat *-faq page, or in general on: http://microformats.org/wiki/faq If there is a specific known issue to report for a specific microformat, add it to the *-issues page for that microformat. If there is a specific known issue that applies to several microformats (eg class microformats) add it to: http://microformats.org/wiki/issues The goal is to *minimize* thrash / going in circles on email (a common problem in standards related communities), and instead to capture and grow our collective knowledge and understanding on the wiki. Thanks, Tantek -Original Message- From: thomas lörtsch tho...@stray.net Sender: microformats-discuss-boun...@microformats.org Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 16:24:40 To: Microformats Discussmicroformats-discuss@microformats.org Reply-To: Microformats Discuss microformats-discuss@microformats.org Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] schema.org, microformats.org, hRecipe On Jun 29, 2011, at 5:05 PM, Stephen Paul Weber wrote: I remember the itemscope thing coming up. Consensus seemed to be that is solved by root class names, but that was so long ago I forget. I assume that people created wiki pages documenting this? If not, why not? Microformats.org is a wiki first, and the mailing lists and IRC just facilitate the wiki. IMHO, if it's not documented on the wiki, then it's just a discussion. Well, just a discussion wouldn't be a bad start. Or do you suggest that I open a wiki page on my question? Thomas °|´ in pursuit of the gestalt of it all / ^^^ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss °|´ in pursuit of the gestalt of it all / ^^^ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] schema.org, microformats.org, hRecipe
On Jun 29, 2011, at 5:05 PM, Stephen Paul Weber wrote: I remember the itemscope thing coming up. Consensus seemed to be that is solved by root class names, but that was so long ago I forget. I assume that people created wiki pages documenting this? If not, why not? Microformats.org is a wiki first, and the mailing lists and IRC just facilitate the wiki. IMHO, if it's not documented on the wiki, then it's just a discussion. Well, just a discussion wouldn't be a bad start. Or do you suggest that I open a wiki page on my question? Thomas °|´ in pursuit of the gestalt of it all / ^^^ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] schema.org, microformats.org, hRecipe
The point is to capture specific issues rather than have a discussion - a discussion where nothing is recorded on the wiki is nearly worthless and may as well have not happened. If it doesn't get captured on a discoverable URL, it might as well not exist (and no, email archives are NOT discoverable). I don't remember anyone asking for anything like itemscope in microformats. This list or IRC (preferably) is a good place to start with questions, but if there is an answer it should be captured by the author in an FAQ either specific to a microformat *-faq page, or in general on: http://microformats.org/wiki/faq If there is a specific known issue to report for a specific microformat, add it to the *-issues page for that microformat. If there is a specific known issue that applies to several microformats (eg class microformats) add it to: http://microformats.org/wiki/issues The goal is to *minimize* thrash / going in circles on email (a common problem in standards related communities), and instead to capture and grow our collective knowledge and understanding on the wiki. Thanks, Tantek -Original Message- From: thomas lörtsch tho...@stray.net Sender: microformats-discuss-boun...@microformats.org Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 16:24:40 To: Microformats Discussmicroformats-discuss@microformats.org Reply-To: Microformats Discuss microformats-discuss@microformats.org Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] schema.org, microformats.org, hRecipe On Jun 29, 2011, at 5:05 PM, Stephen Paul Weber wrote: I remember the itemscope thing coming up. Consensus seemed to be that is solved by root class names, but that was so long ago I forget. I assume that people created wiki pages documenting this? If not, why not? Microformats.org is a wiki first, and the mailing lists and IRC just facilitate the wiki. IMHO, if it's not documented on the wiki, then it's just a discussion. Well, just a discussion wouldn't be a bad start. Or do you suggest that I open a wiki page on my question? Thomas °|´ in pursuit of the gestalt of it all / ^^^ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Document your work discoverably on the web or don't bother. Was Re: [uf-discuss] schema.org, microformats.org, hRecipe
Derrick, If something was brought up on a regular basis by newcomers, provide the URLs, otherwise we are right to dismiss your assertion. No one was driven out. We've had to ban a few trolls for negative behaviors for fixed periods of time, but haven't had to do any such thing for over a year (maybe 2) now. If you had actual parsing uses-cases for such a feature as well as publishing use-cases, at what URL did you document them? If you consider requiring documentation on the web/wiki and being rigorous as elitism of uf.org then, yes, you're not going to be very productive. And you're right, developing microformats is not for everyone - only those that are willing to document their work and be scientific in their methods. If you consider science to be a cabal, then you're not going to find much sympathy and should take your name-calling elsewhere. Document your work on discoverable URLs (preferably on the wiki) or don't bother complaining. Tantek -Original Message- From: Derrick Pallas derr...@pallas.us Sender: microformats-discuss-boun...@microformats.org Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 07:33:52 To: Microformats Discussmicroformats-discuss@microformats.org Reply-To: Microformats Discuss microformats-discuss@microformats.org Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] schema.org, microformats.org, hRecipe Notice that they have an itemscope in HTML5, something many people talked about on microformats.org for years. A few years ago it was brought up on a regular basis by newcomers, about twice a year; said newcomers were then driven out of the community. So there was discussion, just not very nice nor very productive. When I worked for Alexa, I had actual parsing uses-cases for such a feature as well as publishing use-cases and I was one of those newcomers, not the first and not the last. Not everyone tried to follow the process but I did, to the same end. After everything, the elitism of uf.org turned me off to the whole effort. That's not to say uf.org isn't full of nice, intelligent people — it is — just that I decided not to waste my time trying to be in the cabal. And this email is not intended to beat a dead horse, just to share my own experiences. ~D On 6/29/2011 2:55 AM, thomas lörtsch wrote: Hi all, I don't want to discuss the schema.org effort in general here, although there surely is a lot to discuss about it. My question is how collaboration between Google.com and microformats.org is organized, where it's taking place, who is involved. I'm sure there is and has always been some informal exchange, since people happen to know each other, meet at confernces or other events etc, and of course that's fine with me. I was wondering though when I read the following statement in a transcript of the Schema.org BOF at SemTech 2011http://www.w3.org/2011/06/semtech-bof-notes.html: [...] Kevin Marks: Microformats says have a discussion first. You did that with hRecipe, so I'm surprsed to see you didnt go through that here. That'a the difference in phsilophy Tantek Çelik: Google (Kavi in particular!) successfully worked with the open community on both hReview-aggregate and hRecipe - openly. [...] Kevin Marks: hRecipe was a great example of how Google can do this. [...] This sounds like quite some conversations, discussions and thorough work. Now I wonder: how specifically did that great and successfull work with the open community go? Where did it take place? Who was involved? And what exactly was worked out? I won't hesitate to admit that I wasn't a very good editor of hRecipe since summer 2009 but I still am the editor as indicated on the hRecipe wikipage. I wasn't contacted by anyone regarding Rich Snippets, Schema.org or any other Google activity. Also I couldn't find any mention on the mailinglists or on the wiki. So, please: what's going on, what did I miss? Or how is this open? Since Schema.org now promotes a recipe vocabulary that is slightly different from hRecipe and also more elaborated I would like to discuss what to do about that: maybe analyze the differences, observe uptake, then align hRecipe where appropriate etc. But before I start to work on that I'd like to understand what happened until now. Cheers, Thomas Lörtsch °|´ in pursuit of the gestalt of it all / ^^^ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] schema.org, microformats.org, hRecipe
Notice that they have an itemscope in HTML5, something many people talked about on microformats.org for years. A few years ago it was brought up on a regular basis by newcomers, about twice a year; said newcomers were then driven out of the community. So there was discussion, just not very nice nor very productive. When I worked for Alexa, I had actual parsing uses-cases for such a feature as well as publishing use-cases and I was one of those newcomers, not the first and not the last. Not everyone tried to follow the process but I did, to the same end. After everything, the elitism of uf.org turned me off to the whole effort. That's not to say uf.org isn't full of nice, intelligent people — it is — just that I decided not to waste my time trying to be in the cabal. And this email is not intended to beat a dead horse, just to share my own experiences. ~D On 6/29/2011 2:55 AM, thomas lörtsch wrote: Hi all, I don't want to discuss the schema.org effort in general here, although there surely is a lot to discuss about it. My question is how collaboration between Google.com and microformats.org is organized, where it's taking place, who is involved. I'm sure there is and has always been some informal exchange, since people happen to know each other, meet at confernces or other events etc, and of course that's fine with me. I was wondering though when I read the following statement in a transcript of the Schema.org BOF at SemTech 2011http://www.w3.org/2011/06/semtech-bof-notes.html: [...] Kevin Marks: Microformats says have a discussion first. You did that with hRecipe, so I'm surprsed to see you didnt go through that here. That'a the difference in phsilophy Tantek Çelik: Google (Kavi in particular!) successfully worked with the open community on both hReview-aggregate and hRecipe - openly. [...] Kevin Marks: hRecipe was a great example of how Google can do this. [...] This sounds like quite some conversations, discussions and thorough work. Now I wonder: how specifically did that great and successfull work with the open community go? Where did it take place? Who was involved? And what exactly was worked out? I won't hesitate to admit that I wasn't a very good editor of hRecipe since summer 2009 but I still am the editor as indicated on the hRecipe wikipage. I wasn't contacted by anyone regarding Rich Snippets, Schema.org or any other Google activity. Also I couldn't find any mention on the mailinglists or on the wiki. So, please: what's going on, what did I miss? Or how is this open? Since Schema.org now promotes a recipe vocabulary that is slightly different from hRecipe and also more elaborated I would like to discuss what to do about that: maybe analyze the differences, observe uptake, then align hRecipe where appropriate etc. But before I start to work on that I'd like to understand what happened until now. Cheers, Thomas Lörtsch °|´ in pursuit of the gestalt of it all / ^^^ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] schema.org, microformats.org, hRecipe
Somebody claiming to be Derrick Pallas wrote: Notice that they have an itemscope in HTML5, something many people talked about on microformats.org for years. A few years ago it was brought up on a regular basis by newcomers, about twice a year; said newcomers were then driven out of the community. You still seem to be here :) I remember the itemscope thing coming up. Consensus seemed to be that is solved by root class names, but that was so long ago I forget. I assume that people created wiki pages documenting this? If not, why not? Microformats.org is a wiki first, and the mailing lists and IRC just facilitate the wiki. IMHO, if it's not documented on the wiki, then it's just a discussion. Anyway :) -- Stephen Paul Weber, @singpolyma See http://singpolyma.net for how I prefer to be contacted edition right joseph ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
