Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose)

On Oct 21, 2006, at 9:58 AM, Charles Roper wrote: Can anyone give any real *disadvantages* to using output compression? If you do it right, none. Some browsers, like IE 5 and maybe 6, have problems with compressed, cached JavaScript and other weird edge cases. However, most HTTP servers com

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations)

On Oct 21, 2006, at 9:37 AM, Charles Roper wrote: On 21/10/06, Andy Mabbett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I don't think the intention is that the raw markup of a uF be "human-readable first". This is a good point; what, exactly, should be "human readable first?" I always assumed it was the rend

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose)

On 10/21/06, Charles Roper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Can anyone give any real *disadvantages* to using output compression? The choice to use compression is one of bandwidth vs. processing time. I have personally had a bad experience with a cut-rate ISP who had some sort of CPU-usage throttling

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations)

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Benjamin West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >>From : >"geo is a 1:1 representation of the "geo" property in the vCard >standard (RFC2426 (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2426.txt)) in XHTML" > >As you can see, the authors of the spec weren'

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations)

I think this has been mentioned before, but I'll mention it again. From : "geo is a 1:1 representation of the "geo" property in the vCard standard (RFC2426 (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2426.txt)) in XHTML" As you can see, the authors of the spec weren't the one

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations)

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Charles Roper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >> >I think comparing geo and sci, etc. is not a great example as I think >> >geo can be thought of as a well known abbreviation. >> >> Yes, it clearly identifies rocks, to geologists ;-) >> >> But seriously, do you really th

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose)

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Charles Roper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >Can anyone give any real *disadvantages* to using output compression? Perhaps not - but is it always available to people? Not everyone manages (or has access to the management of) the servers on which their content resides.

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose)

On 21/10/06, Kevin Marks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On the broader point, assuming you use gzip when you care about size, abbreviations don't save much, especially in the many-repeated case discussed. This is one of my primary arguments against using abbreviations. See my original post: http:/

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations)

On 21/10/06, Andy Mabbett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> And yet we have "geo". > >I think comparing geo and sci, etc. is not a great example as I think >geo can be thought of as a well known abbreviation. Yes, it clearly identifies rocks, to geologists ;-) But seriously, do you really think it'

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations)

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Christopher Rines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >> And yet we have "geo". > >I think comparing geo and sci, etc. is not a great example as I think >geo can be thought of as a well known abbreviation. Yes, it clearly identifies rocks, to geologists ;-) But seriously,

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose)

On Oct 19, 2006, at 9:57 PM, Christopher Rines wrote: In my opinion amount is a really difficult one to abbreviate (or any measure for that matter) as it can be used to describe a lot of other things for which there is not yet a microformat but cur (for currency) is interesting as just off t

Re: RE: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations)

On 20/10/06, Brian Suda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- the tricky thing is that there are no namespaces in Microformats, so if you use cur, sure it is scopped to 'money', but it is now a 'reserved word' for all of microformats. As it was pointed out in a previous message, then what happens to 'cu

Re: RE: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations)

On 10/20/06, Mike Schinkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: However, and this is an honest question, isn't "currency" and "amount" really only valid in context with "money?" Wouldn't that make it okay to abbreviate the children of money, like so?: $ 5.99 ---

RE: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose)

Hey Mike, This is an very good/interesting example... In my opinion amount is a really difficult one to abbreviate (or any measure for that matter) as it can be used to describe a lot of other things for which there is not yet a microformat but cur (for currency) is interesting as just off the

RE: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations)

hristopher Rines Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2006 10:45 PM To: microformats-discuss@microformats.org Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations) In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Charles Roper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in addition to other things said: > Should &quo

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations)

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Charles Roper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in addition to other things said: > Should "bin", var", "cult", etc., be written in full? (I think not, to > save bloating file sizes) > These abbreviations are absolutely fine within the very narrow domain of > biological nomencl