RE: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

amples at this point but I haven't yet, and I certainly don't want to get the shot down because I present them prematurely prepared. -Mike -----Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Reynen Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2006 1:46 PM To: Microfo

RE: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

day, October 26, 2006 1:38 PM To: Microformats Discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement? Hi Andy, On Oct 26, 2006, at 10:28 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dr. > Ernie Prabhakar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes > >> A

RE: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

, October 26, 2006 1:28 PM To: Microformats Discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement? In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike Schinkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >>> cardinal sin > >Is this a pragmatic group that I'm working with, or a b

RE: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

ECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Colin Barrett Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2006 1:38 PM To: Microformats Discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement? On Oct 26, 2006, at 7:28 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dr. >

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

On 27 Oct 2006, at 00:58, Colin Barrett wrote: @ represents an attribute, so @rel=tag means @rel tag with the value ‘tag’. The most advanced I've seen it get in general discussion is of the form [EMAIL PROTECTED], which means ‘element named foo with an attribute bar with value ‘sheep’. T

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

On Oct 26, 2006, at 8:04 AM, Ben Ward wrote: On 26 Oct 2006, at 18:35, Colin Barrett wrote: On Oct 26, 2006, at 7:25 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote: In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ciaran McNulty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes @rel=bookmark I've seen several people refer to such things with an opening

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Colin Barrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >>> @rel=bookmark >> >> I've seen several people refer to such things with an opening "@" - >>what >> does it mean? >> > >I'm not sure on the etymology, but they're referring to attributes on >(X)HTML tags. As in "@tribuyte"

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

I just wrote: > If people object, it's probably unreasonable > When of course I mean ‘not unreasonable’. and: > @ represents an attribute, so @rel=tag means @rel tag with the value > ‘tag’ > @ represents an attribute, so @rel=tag means the attribute rel with the value 'tag'. My mind is frazz

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

On 26 Oct 2006, at 18:35, Colin Barrett wrote: On Oct 26, 2006, at 7:25 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote: In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ciaran McNulty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes @rel=bookmark I've seen several people refer to such things with an opening "@" - what does it mean? I'm not sure on the e

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

On Oct 26, 2006, at 3:07 AM, Mike Schinkel wrote: I'm still not convinced. I've only heard generalities and no specifics on anything I've heard regarding my use-case. RDF is far to complicated for the average person creating HTML; one reason why I don't think it will ever fly. I still kn

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

Hi Andy, On Oct 26, 2006, at 10:28 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote: In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dr. Ernie Prabhakar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes As long as you don't call it a microformat, feel free to experiment. :-) Why shouldn't he call it a microformat? Sorry, I may have conflated too many i

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

On Oct 26, 2006, at 7:28 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote: In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dr. Ernie Prabhakar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes As long as you don't call it a microformat, feel free to experiment. :-) Why shouldn't he call it a microformat? Because it hasn't gone through the (fairly rig

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

On Oct 26, 2006, at 7:25 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote: In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ciaran McNulty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes @rel=bookmark I've seen several people refer to such things with an opening "@" - what does it mean? I'm not sure on the etymology, but they're referring to attrib

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dr. Ernie Prabhakar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >As long as you don't call it a microformat, feel free to experiment. >:-) Why shouldn't he call it a microformat? -- Andy Mabbett Say "NO!" to compulsory ID Cards:

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike Schinkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >>> cardinal sin > >Is this a pragmatic group that I'm working with, or a bunch of >religious zealots that I've managed to get entangle with? [assuming you're not joking] "cardinal" in this sense means: "essential"

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ciaran McNulty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >@rel=bookmark I've seen several people refer to such things with an opening "@" - what does it mean? -- Andy Mabbett Say "NO!" to compulsory ID Cards: Free Our Da

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

On 10/26/06, Mike Schinkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Thanks. That maybe solves this use case. Can you do the same using in the in case you don't want the hyperlink visible? Or what about on a within ? And do you know if the search engines pay any attention to this? @rel=bookmark is scope

RE: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

ailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ciaran McNulty Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2006 4:15 AM To: Microformats Discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement? On 10/26/06, Mike Schinkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm still not convinced. I've only

RE: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

pecific one. Otherwise, the 301 would be a nobrainer. -Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Marks Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 11:24 PM To: Microformats Discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requiremen

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

On 10/26/06, Mike Schinkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'm still not convinced. I've only heard generalities and no specifics on anything I've heard regarding my use-case. RDF is far to complicated for the average person creating HTML; one reason why I don't think it will ever fly. I still know

RE: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

7:31 PM To: Microformats Discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement? On Oct 25, 2006, at 5:15 PM, Mike Schinkel wrote: > Thanks Charles. > > However I still have no idea why these things apply to specifying > which page among of group of equi

RE: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

it... -Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dr. Ernie Prabhakar Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 6:44 PM To: Microformats Discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement? Hi Mike, Your always welcome to us

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

On Oct 23, 2006, at 1:11 AM, Mike Schinkel wrote: Let me go ahead and give you a hypothetical example (I have had the exact problem in the past, so it is a real problem, it's just that explain in hypotheical requires less background explanation): http://www.wiki-info.org/platforms/linu

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

On Oct 25, 2006, at 5:15 PM, Mike Schinkel wrote: Thanks Charles. However I still have no idea why these things apply to specifying which page among of group of equivalent pages is authoritative and why Microformats do not. The latter seem a perfect fit to me, and what you listed either

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

rmats Discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement? Hello Mike, XML, Semantic HTML, and RDF are closely related to what is being done here. But there's alot of other technologies for specific areas. Like with multimedia type thigns we have SMIL, XSPF, etc

RE: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

day, October 25, 2006 5:58 PM To: Microformats Discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement? Hello Mike, XML, Semantic HTML, and RDF are closely related to what is being done here. But there's alot of other technologies for specific areas. Like with multimedia

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

2006 8:25 AM To: Microformats Discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement? On Oct 24, 2006, at 3:41 AM, Mike Schinkel wrote: > Is there a clear and definitive objective statement that explains the > class of problems that microformats are intended to solve? I&#x

RE: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

rom: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Reynen Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 8:25 AM To: Microformats Discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement? On Oct 24, 2006, at 3:41 AM, Mike Schinkel wrote: > Is there a clear and defini

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

On Oct 24, 2006, at 3:41 AM, Mike Schinkel wrote: Is there a clear and definitive objective statement that explains the class of problems that microformats are intended to solve? I've not sure the context of this question, but I think the closest we have is from the about page [1]: "Desi

RE: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

Monday, October 23, 2006 6:08 AM To: Microformats Discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement? On 10/23/06, Mike Schinkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I'd suggest could be solved using an appropriate new [EMAIL PROTECTED], > >> and &

RE: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

enjamin West Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 2:01 PM To: Microformats Discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement? > > So, what if your take on this problem and use-case? Search engines make use of shingles to identify pages and their aliases. Some search engi

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

So, what if your take on this problem and use-case? Search engines make use of shingles to identify pages and their aliases. Some search engines employ teams of editors and solicit feedback from the web community to ensure their aliasing techniques are correct. As far as I can tell, this isn'

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

On 10/23/06, Mike Schinkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I'd suggest could be solved using an appropriate new [EMAIL PROTECTED], and then convicing the search engines to pay attention to it ;-) Do you mean in ? Did you see my earlier comments about wikis, CMS, and forums, where the user often

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

On 10/23/06, Michael MD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For the specific example you mention, the '2 hours' declaration could > probably be used as the DURATION (probably with an ABBR) and then > transcluded into each VEVENT using the include-pattern. do many parsers out there support include-patte

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

> For the specific example you mention, the '2 hours' declaration could > probably be used as the DURATION (probably with an ABBR) and then > transcluded into each VEVENT using the include-pattern. > do many parsers out there support include-pattern yet? ... whereas any older or very simple hCale

RE: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

good idea, it's something I'd be quite interested in too. And there are several more where that one came from. :) Maybe if Tantek vetos you can help me go create yet another initiative for "hidden Microformat-like metadata?" :-) -Mike -Original Message----- From: [EMAIL

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

On 10/23/06, Mike Schinkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: So, what if your take on this problem and use-case? I'm not Tantek, but you're use-case seems eminently reasonable, and I'd suggest could be solved using an appropriate new [EMAIL PROTECTED], and then convicing the search engines to pay atte

RE: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

-----Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tantek Ç elik Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 3:25 AM To: microformats-discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement? On 10/23/06 12:11 AM, "Mike Schinkel" <[EMAIL PRO

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

On 10/23/06, Andy Mabbett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Consider a page of events, with variable start times; and an introductory paragraph which says "all events last for two hours". You're saying that the microformat should not include a "dtend" with the end time, for each event, because that end

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

Hello Andy, On 10/23/06, Andy Mabbett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tantek Çelik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >Rarely is metadata actually metadata. > >It is most often simply properties of the information which are still >relevant to the user and thus should be visib

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tantek Çelik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >> But what if the website publisher (or graphic designer) does not want that >> information to be visible on the page? > >Then it is not worth trusting the information nor worth the time making a >microformat for it. Again,

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tantek Çelik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >Rarely is metadata actually metadata. > >It is most often simply properties of the information which are still >relevant to the user and thus should be visible. > >If it is not worth or appropriate to make the information vis

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

On 10/23/06 12:11 AM, "Mike Schinkel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> If it is not worth or appropriate to make the information visible, then >>> it is not worth trusting the information and certainly not worth the time to >>> make a microformat for it. > > But what if the website publisher (or gr

RE: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

ing the community to help find a name for a potential uF.) -Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tantek Ç elik Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 2:16 AM To: microformats-discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

Re: [uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

On 10/22/06 11:10 PM, "Mike Schinkel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Brian Suda recently said: > >>> the problem with using Meta elements is that they are out-side >>> of human-readable realm. One of the key factors in microformats >>> is to keep the data visible, it keeps it fresh, prevents many

[uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?

Brian Suda recently said: >>the problem with using Meta elements is that they are out-side >> of human-readable realm. One of the key factors in microformats >> is to keep the data visible, it keeps it fresh, prevents many of >> the abuses that have befallen meta-keywords, and also allows >>