Not sure this is a good thing since, from the article, it
looks like
they're already inventing their own.
If they're simply using more semantics in their HTML, that's
great!
BUT, that doesn't mean they're microformats without going
through
community process.
So, I support their adoption of the principles and practices
of
microformats, but am reluctant to call their work
"microformats"
without also implementing the open, research-driven
development process.
Chris
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 26, 2007, at 1:22 PM, Chris Saad <chris.saad gmail.com> wrote:
>
> http://www.eweek.com/
article2/0,1895,2228011,00.asp
> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
> You received this message because you are subscribed to
the Google
> Groups "DataPortability Workgroup" group.
> To post to this group, send email to
dataportabilitygooglegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
dataportability-unsubscribegooglegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/dataportability?hl=en
> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
>
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss
|
