Re: microformats for normal people, like my mum

> They imply opening or saving a completely separate
document/file

The interface model doesn't necessarily have to actually
match the  
implementation model, but yeah, I'm still not a huge fan of
the  
attachments idea.

Some other interface specific names I've been thinking
about

"Pointers" for: http://tinyurl.com/278y8g
"Hyperlayers" for: http://tinyurl.com/26mqf3
(or "layers" for short)

Both of those names have previously been shot down inside
Mozilla,  
ironically enough because some people felt that the
interface-level  
name should emerge out of the microformats community.  In
the past  
Web browsers have lagged far enough behind the evolution of
the Web  
that names have already been established (like with Feeds).

-Alex



On Jun 29, 2007, at 12:04 AM, Joe Andrieu wrote:

> Alex,
>
> I would suggest that attachments are definitely a bad
idea. They  
> imply opening or saving a completely separate
document/file and
> are, as you state, "danger" waiting to
happen.
>
> LiveData
> HyperData
> SmartData
> WebData
> MagicData
>
> LiveBits
> HyperBits
> SmartBits
> WebBits
> MagicBits
>
> Bits being a combination of both bits/bytes and
tidbits.
>
> Someone somewhere is going to name this thing. It might
be a  
> journalist. It might be FF. It could be a blogger.
>
>
> The idea that there is data embedded in a web page that
the browser  
> can consistently interact with beyond the hyperlink is
new.
> Especially when that embedding and the interactions are
consistent  
> across many many webpages, but not all web pages. 
Users will
> name it something. I think people understand
"data" but rarely have  
> a need to speak of data generally--we talk about
contacts or
> events or people or reviews.
>
> But when "my brain is full": it's got too
much stuff. Too much  
> data. I think people get that. Data is generalized
digital bits in
> some way that's useful. hCards, hCalendars, GEO, XFN
and other uF  
> or POSH generalize to data. Semantic data.
>
> Of course, "bookmarks" were a pretty
innovative metaphor.  Perhaps  
> there is something completely different that works.
Maybe
> something from tidbits. Or morsels...
>
> Anyway, good luck. I expect you might have more luck
with the FF crew.
>
> -j
>
> --
> Joe Andrieu
> SwitchBook Software
> http://www.switchbook.com
> joeswitchbook.com
> +1 (805) 705-8651
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: microformats-discuss-bouncesmicroformats.org
>> [mailto:microformats-discuss-bouncesmicroformats.org] On
>> Behalf Of Alex Faaborg
>> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 11:40 PM
>> To: Microformats Discuss
>> Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] microformats for normal
people, like my mum
>>
>>
>> I've been giving some thought to framing
microformatted content as
>> "attachments," along with a little paper
clip icon.  This would
>> resonate with users who are familiar with email,
but on the
>> downside,
>> a lot of people have been trained that
attachments=danger.
>>
>> -Alex
>>
>> On Jun 28, 2007, at 11:29 PM, Pelle W wrote:
>>
>>> Paul Wilkins skrev:
>>>> From: "Alex Faaborg"
<faaborgmozilla.com>
>>>> |> Mozilla's user experience team is
going to continue
>>>> brainstorming the
>>>>> best way to expose microformat
detection to end users, along with
>>>>> the rest of the mozilla community. 
I'll post updates to this
>>>>> list from  time to time, and it will be
interesting to see what
>>>>> interfaces and  names other people come
up with as well.
>>>> The RSS feeds are accessed in the browser
through the feed
>> button. So
>>>> it makes sense that the microformat data
should be accessed
>>>> through the data button.
>>>>
>>>> I do like data, it's concise and is easy to
explain.
>>>>
>>>> Q: What kind of data can I get from the
data button?
>>>> A: Contact details, calender entries,
geographic locations, . . .
>>>>
>>>> Q: Does the data button always get the
information?
>>>> A: No, only when the page author has
specially marked out those
>>>> parts of the page.
>>> Data sounds good but since RSS also is data the
RSS-feed should
>>> perhaps be reached from below the data-button
to emphasize the
>>> similarities.
>>>
>>> / Pelle
>>>
_______________________________________________
>>> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Alex Faaborg skrev:
>> They imply opening or saving a completely separate
document/file
> The interface model doesn't necessarily have to
actually match the 
> implementation model, but yeah, I'm still not a huge
fan of the 
> attachments idea.
>
> "Pointers" for: http://tinyurl.com/278y8g
> "Hyperlayers" for: http://tinyurl.com/26mqf3
> (or "layers" for short)
Those names sound very catchy - but in my ears perhaps a bit
too much 
like something coming from a classic PR-campaign. At least
"Hyperlayers" 
- image an ad with the text "Increase your productivity
with the all new 
Firefox 3 now with hyperlayers". Very cool - but does
it actually tell 
us something?

Can't it be kept simple? Does it have to be a new name -
couldn't it 
rather be a description of an action - like data extraction?
(Don't know 
if thats the right spelling though)
That would tell what it does and it would be less PR-like
and more 
"honest"(?) - it's just plain simply describing
what this new thing does 
and that's what I think is most important. Keep it simple.
> Both of those names have previously been shot down
inside Mozilla, 
> ironically enough because some people felt that the
interface-level 
> name should emerge out of the microformats community. 
In the past Web 
> browsers have lagged far enough behind the evolution of
the Web that 
> names have already been established (like with Feeds).
Well - that is ironic  Perhaps
the "real" place for this would be 
among the comments on a YouTube-movie featuring this in
action or in 
blogosphere? But that does however not stop us from having
this 
discussion...

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