Re: [uf-new] Metadata/machine-readable data patterns
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 4:01 AM, Nelson Menezes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To cut to the chase: why not use input type=hidden / fields to store metadata that must be machine-read within microformats? It would avoid stretching the semantics of existing tags and (I believe) avoid issues with screen readers. Besides, it's what the tag is for... I'd read: http://tantek.com/log/2005/06.html#d03t2359 then spend a bit of time looking through the mailing list and chat logs (google with site:microformats.org is helpful) Short version: If you gotta hide stuff (like ISO dates), then hide them very, very close to the visible representation on the page of the thing you're hiding. If there's no visible version, then you probably don't want an invisible version, either. But that's just a fraction of the full argument. If you're serious about wading in I'd highly suggest doing the reading... -cks -- Christopher St. John http://artofsystems.blogspot.com ___ microformats-new mailing list microformats-new@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
Re: [uf-new] Microformats for Slide Show/Presentations - hShow, hSlide - State-of-the-Art?
On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 4:55 PM, Drew McLellan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hAtom is describing a list of time-related items, and within each item describing the timestamp, description, summary and all the component parts that make up that item. It's adding extra information about the relationships between the discreet data points that enables us to understand them more fully. What it's not describing is how that is data is treated with regard to presentation. Wouldn't that also be more or less what a slideshow format does? I think you could re-state the format as being a time-sequenced series of related bits of information. Maybe with the addition that the info may also be associated with a spoken narrative of some sort. The fact that slide authoring programs allow multiple views (slideshow, speaker notes, and even an outline view) suggests that there's an underlying concept beyond just presentation. On the other hand, there are several existing microformats that might be good to reuse, has the original poster given that a shot yet? -cks -- Christopher St. John http://artofsystems.blogspot.com ___ microformats-new mailing list microformats-new@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
Re: [uf-new] Namespace anti-pattern and hAudio TITLE (was: hAudio FN or Title)
On Feb 4, 2008 4:05 PM, Brian Suda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We must be talking past one another with our definitions, it is probably best to start a wiki page and the discussion will not get lose between posts and threads. It will also make it easier for anyone to reference later. Continuing this thread will not be productive for very long. Actually, I've found it quite useful. Manu has brought up several points that I've been concerned about. I've almost chimed in a couple of times but Manu has beaten me to it and I've been reluctant to just post me too :-) Just because one person doesn't find a long and interesting thread productive doesn't mean it isn't productive for others. And, for the record, for most of Manu's comments: Me too. -cks -- Christopher St. John http://artofsystems.blogspot.com ___ microformats-new mailing list microformats-new@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
Re: namespaces bad topic for uf mailing lists reminder (was Re: [uf-new] Namespace anti-pattern and hAudio TITLE (was: hAudio FN or Title))
On Feb 4, 2008 5:08 PM, Tantek Çelik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2/4/08 1:25 PM, Martin McEvoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually, I've found it quite useful. Manu has brought up several points that I've been concerned about. I've almost chimed in a couple of times but Manu has beaten me to it and I've been reluctant to just post me too :-) Just because one person doesn't find a long and interesting thread productive doesn't mean it isn't productive for others. That may be true, however, we decided long ago, that this wasn't a good forum for having such discussions about namespaces - there are other forums where you may find more others that find long discussions about namespaces interesting. http://microformats.org/wiki/mailing-lists#bad-topic-namespaces (Much of) the discussion isn't about that kind of namespaces. It's about trying to clarify how the word used on the Wiki (in a very specific sense) has a more broadly accepted meaning that differs in important ways. The fact that no namespaces dogma makes little sense to people familiar with the general meaning suggests that clarification is important. Manu's post with references to the various meanings is probably something that should go up on the wiki. It's a productive contribution to the issue and a demonstration that dogmas should occasionally be pulled out from their glass case and given a good shaking. -cks -- Christopher St. John http://artofsystems.blogspot.com ___ microformats-new mailing list microformats-new@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
Re: [uf-new] an equation/MathML/TeX microformat?
On 10/26/07, Jeff McNeill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not quite sure that (alt=) is not its intended or suggested use ...
There are (at least) three artifacts involved:
a) The text that should be pronounced by a screen reader ( the alt
text in img
src=http://jeffmcneill.com/cgi-bin/mimetex.cgi?E(aX+b)=aE(X)+b
alt= E(aX+b)=aE(X)+b / )
b) The underlying semantic representation, possibly MathML,
possibly TeX). As (a) shows you can sometimes _say_ TeX (and
sometimes arguably not: \Large f(x)=\int_{-\infty}^x e^{-t^2}dt), but
nobody should ever be forced to listen to MathML spoken aloud
because it looks like this: ...mrowmsupmfenced open=
[ close=]mrowmia/mimo+/mo...
c) The img that is the rendering of the underlying semantic
markup.
But the Wikipedia work is certainly a good start at an examples list,
and in my Googling around I came across several others. Although I
have a sneaking suspicion this might not really be a big-M uf thing,
it's certainly seems worth gathering more examples as ammunition
for whatever next step is appropriate.
On 10/26/07, Paul Topping [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... It is
exactly this kind of hack that I'm looking to microformats to escape
from.
In that case, you're going to _hate_ microformats, because they
don't so much escape those kinds of hacks as enshrine them
as standards :-)
-cks
--
Christopher St. John
http://artofsystems.blogspot.com
___
microformats-new mailing list
microformats-new@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
Re: [uf-new] title vs. summary (was: Third attempt at hAudio)
On 6/8/07, Brian Suda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: this is NOT a bug, it is a feature of NOT having namespace in that you can use the same property across many domains. This IS different than other languages like XML, microformats are NOT the same. I may have elided too much and got the antecedent of it wrong, but can I read this as a suggestion that not having namespaces helps with reusing the same property across many domains? -cks -- Christopher St. John http://artofsystems.blogspot.com ___ microformats-new mailing list microformats-new@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
