Text::Microformat - a uf parser for Perl

Hello,

Just thought I'd let everyone know about a new Perl module
for
parsing microformats.

ht
tp://nearlyfree.org/introducing-text-microformat

Text::Microformat is an extensible Microformat-parsing
framework, which allows
not only new kinds of microformats to be added, but also
extension of the
parser itself, so new parsing metaphors and source document
encodings could  be
added.

Features so far:
  * Extracting Microformats from HTML, XHTML and XML
  * Extracting Microformats from entity-encoded or CDATA
sections in RSS feeds.
  * The include pattern
  * Microformats built from other Microformats

Supported formats:
  * hCard
  * hGrant

These are the only formats because they were required for
the project
I'm working on, but I'd love to see more formats supported.

Project page: http://code.google.c
om/p/ufperl/
CPAN page: http
://search.cpan.org/perldoc?Text::Microformat

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

POSH now has a page at wikipedia


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plain_Old_Semantic_HTML

anyone who might be interested in adding editing and
contributing,  
please head over at your convenience 

john

John Allsopp

style master :: css editor :: http://westciv.com/st
yle_master
about me :: http://johnfallsopp.com
Web Directions Conferences :: http://webdirections.org

My Microformats book :: http://microformatiqu
e.com/book

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

Keith Grennan wrote:
> Supported formats:
>   * hCard
>   * hGrant

hGrant is not a microformat. hGrant *is* reusable semantic
markup  
(POSH by another name).

On this page:
http://hg
rants.org/index.php?title=Tutorial
you refer to hGrant as a microformat. This is incorrect.
Please read  
the wiki page that describes the microformats process:

http://microform
ats.org/wiki/process

If, after reading this, it still isn't clear to you why you
can't  
simply label hGrant a microformat, please let me know so
that we can  
work towards making the description of the process more
understandable.

Thanks,

Bye,

Jeremy

-- 
Jeremy Keith

a d a c t i o

http://adactio.com/


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

On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 02:59:30PM +0100, Jeremy Keith
wrote:
> Keith Grennan wrote:
> >Supported formats:
> >  * hCard
> >  * hGrant
> 
> hGrant is not a microformat. hGrant *is* reusable
semantic markup  
> (POSH by another name).

Good to know.  I'll update my documentation.

> On this page:
> http://hg
rants.org/index.php?title=Tutorial
> you refer to hGrant as a microformat. This is
incorrect. Please read  
> the wiki page that describes the microformats process:

I am not the author of that site, but I believe the author
(eekim) is
subscribed to this list.

> http://microform
ats.org/wiki/process
> 
> If, after reading this, it still isn't clear to you why
you can't  
> simply label hGrant a microformat, please let me know
so that we can  
> work towards making the description of the process more
understandable.

No, this document is abundantly clear.  Thanks for pointing
me to it.

Cheers,
Keith

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bye,
> 
> Jeremy
> 
> -- 
> Jeremy Keith
> 
> a d a c t i o
> 
> http://adactio.com/
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> microformats-discuss mailing list
> microformats-discussmicroformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

In message <2D9D7010-8DDC-4696-94CB-AC62E4AAC380adactio.com>, Jeremy
Keith <jeremyadactio.com> writes

>Keith Grennan wrote:
>> Supported formats:

>>   * hGrant
>
>hGrant is not a microformat. hGrant *is* reusable
semantic markup
>(POSH by another name).

That's a point-of view, but not a definitive fact. Who says
it's not a
microformat? With what authority?

>On this page:
>http://hg
rants.org/index.php?title=Tutorial
>you refer to hGrant as a microformat. This is incorrect.
Please read
>the wiki page that describes the microformats process:
>
>http://microform
ats.org/wiki/process
>
>If, after reading this, it still isn't clear to you why
you can't
>simply label hGrant a microformat, please let me know so
that we can
>work towards making the description of the process more
understandable.

What happens if Microsoft or Mozilla (or both together)
announce that
the next version of their browser(s) will support
"microformat X", with
a specification for marking up, say, play-lists (or
whatever), what
makes you think they and their users would pay any heed to
protestations
here?

Indeed, why should they, especially while issues around
governance and
licensing raised by this "community" remain
largely unaddressed, and
requests for evidence to support proposed formats are met,
at some
effort, and then ignored by the requester?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
            *  Say "NO!" to compulsory ID Cards: 
<http://www.no2id.net/>
            *  Free Our Data:  <http://www.freeourd
ata.org.uk>
            *  Are you using Microformats, yet: <http://microformats.org/
> ?
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

Hi Andy,

On Apr 26, 2007, at 3:35 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote:
> That's a point-of view, but not a definitive fact. Who
says it's  
> not a microformat? With what authority?

Um, is there any authority you *would* accept for that
usage?

The "common usage" on this list is that
"microformats" is best  
applied that markup which follows the microformat process:

> http://microform
ats.org/wiki/process

and that other forms of semantic markup should be referred
to as  
"semantic HTML" or POSH.

I realize you may not like that distinction, and we may or
may not  
have any ability to enforce that, but I think it is only
reasonable  
for us to attempt to enforce community standards, if only
through  
peer pressure.

> What happens if Microsoft or Mozilla (or both together)
announce that
> the next version of their browser(s) will support
"microformat X",  
> with
> a specification for marking up, say, play-lists (or
whatever), what
> makes you think they and their users would pay any heed
to  
> protestations here?

In my experience, many people in organizations like Mozilla
actually  
care a great deal about community precedent -- and the
wishes of the  
original authors of a term -- whether or not it is enforced
in formal  
governance structures.

I like to think of it as "common courtesy", though
I suppose on the  
Internet that's an oxymoron. :-P

- Ernie P.



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

On Apr 26, 2007, at 5:54 PM, Dr. Ernie Prabhakar wrote:

> I realize you may not like that distinction, and we may
or may not  
> have any ability to enforce that, but I think it is
only reasonable  
> for us to attempt to enforce community standards, if
only through  
> peer pressure.

I agree.  I really hope "microformat" won't turn
into just another  
term for "semantic HTML."  Clear communication is
difficult enough  
already without additional ambiguity.

Peace,
Scott

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

On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 07:40:01PM -0500, Scott Reynen
wrote:
> On Apr 26, 2007, at 5:54 PM, Dr. Ernie Prabhakar
wrote:
> 
> >I realize you may not like that distinction, and we
may or may not  
> >have any ability to enforce that, but I think it is
only reasonable  
> >for us to attempt to enforce community standards,
if only through  
> >peer pressure.
> 
> I agree.  I really hope "microformat" won't
turn into just another  
> term for "semantic HTML."  Clear
communication is difficult enough  
> already without additional ambiguity.

I think it already has.

It's like Adobe trying to control how people use the word
'photoshop'.

You end up with single interest group that keeps repeating
"That thing
your refer to is not actually FooBar - these are the real
FooBars over
here".  But no one else cares, because people will use
language to suit
their needs.

As the popularity of the term microformat grows, you might
have to look
for higher ground that's easier to defend.  Because really,
who wants to
spend their time and energy being language police?

Keith

ps. I realize that I'm a newcomer to this community, so I
hope I'm not
offending anyone.  Hopefully my comments are valuable as an
outsider's
first impression.

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

Keith Grennan wrote:
>> I agree.  I really hope "microformat"
won't turn into just another
>> term for "semantic HTML."  Clear
communication is difficult enough
>> already without additional ambiguity.
>>
>
> I think it already has.
>
> It's like Adobe trying to control how people use the
word 'photoshop'.

It certainly seems to be heading that way. But now that we
recognise  
this problem (it was discussed quite a bit at the
microformats dinner  
in SF recently), we can't try to take steps to help clarify
the  
situation. POSH advocacy is a good start. It may be a silly
name but  
it's an important step in making it clear that microformats
are  
narrowly defined but built on top of semantic markup -- a
much wider  
pool:
http://microformats
.org/wiki/posh

> As the popularity of the term microformat grows, you
might have to  
> look
> for higher ground that's easier to defend.  Because
really, who  
> wants to
> spend their time and energy being language police?

I hope it won't come to that but you're right about the
language  
police: I feel like I've spent most of today blogging,
leaving  
comments and responding to emails in an attempt to set
people  
straight on what does and doesn't constitute a microformat.
But like  
I said, at least now that we recognise the problem, we can
make a  
concerted effort to deal with it. I hope that work won't be
Sisyphean.

> ps. I realize that I'm a newcomer to this community, so
I hope I'm not
> offending anyone.  Hopefully my comments are valuable
as an outsider's
> first impression.

As an newcomer, your comments are probably the most valuable
and  
relevant on this issue. Much appreciated.

Bye,

Jeremy

-- 
Jeremy Keith

a d a c t i o

http://adactio.com/


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

Hi,

I was inspired to write an article about why microformats
are cool and
important.  Feel free to take a look.

http
://nearlyfree.org/microformats-sip-sea-water

"...there are 14 billion websites, but like the
scattered builders of the
tower of Babel, these sites are all speaking different
languages. Well,
that's not entirely true - they all speak HTML, but HTML was
not
meant to do much beyond describing how a page of information
should be
displayed to a human (ideally 32 pixels large, without
serifs, pink and
blinking), or declaring that some kind of link between two
documents
exists ("Click here to see pictures of my pet
mongoose"). So
yes, this system was designed to be able to publish all
human knowledge,
but only in a very, very unorganized way, which makes
higher-order
functions like categorization, aggregation, and notification
very very
difficult. For instance, we need Google, the most powerful
supercomputer
brain on the planet, constantly sorting through the muck,
just to help
us find things, which it sometimes might do for you, if
you're
lucky. But being able to find things, though important, is
really only
part of what a useful knowledge system should be able to do.
Information
is much more valuable when it is stored in such a way that
higher-order
operations on it are possible, and better yet, are
easy."

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