professional relations (was: XFN usage stats and Re:rel="muse" implies romantic relation

Am Samstag, 16. Dezember 2006 08:31 schrieb Mike Schinkel:

> You are making an invalid assumption which is that I'm
concerned about my
> markup. No, I'm not. I've concerned about the need for
a standard to be
> created so that a body of knowledge and tools can be
developed around that
> body of knowledge, and people will evangelize and a
large number of people
> will implement.
>
> But that said, it's now clear to me that the
microformat brand is not going
> to address my concern. No need to discuss any more;
it's a dead issue.

Are you sure? In any democracy a standard is a matter of
adoption. And 
microformats do have the potential to be widely adopted.
Although not for the 
majority of pages (at least not within the next ten years).
But that's not a 
matter of microformats. It is simply that the majority of
pages do not care 
for semantic markup at all, so why should they care for
microformats? In an 
old-style page, marked up 100% vo visual effect,
microformats is not even 
thought of. Nevertheless, and although microformats aren't
perfect, it is 
still worth the efford.


_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

Siegfried Gipp wrote:
> Am Samstag, 16. Dezember 2006 08:31 schrieb Mike
Schinkel:
> > You are making an invalid assumption which is that

> > I'm concerned about my markup. No, I'm not. I've 
> > concerned about the need for a standard to be 
> > created so that a body of knowledge and tools can 
> > be developed around that body of knowledge, and 
> > people will evangelize and a large number of
people 
> > will implement.
> >
> > But that said, it's now clear to me that the
microformat 
> > brand is not going to address my concern. No need
to 
> > discuss any more; it's a dead issue.
> 
> Are you sure? In any democracy a standard is a matter
of 
> adoption. And microformats do have the potential to be
widely 
> adopted. Although not for the majority of pages (at
least not 
> within the next ten years). But that's not a matter of 
> microformats. It is simply that the majority of pages
do not 
> care for semantic markup at all, so why should they
care for 
> microformats? In an old-style page, marked up 100% vo
visual 
> effect, microformats is not even thought of.
Nevertheless, 
> and although microformats aren't perfect, it is still
worth 
> the efford.

Thanks for the comment, but I wasn't able to figure out what
point you were
trying to make. 

Were you saying that Microformats will develop to be a
standard?  If that
was your point, I don't debate it; I expect it. But w/o
disambiguation and a
way to scale of the process, I think it will create a mess.

Or are you saying that there won't be a mess because you
don't think many
pages will use Microformats?  

Again, I'm rather confused on your point.

-- 
-Mike Schinkel
http://www.mikesch
inkel.com/blogs/
http://www.welldesig
nedurls.org/



_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss