[uf-dev] Re: [uf-new] Microformats parsing, in general (was: hAudio final draft)

[David Janes]

On 6/19/07, Scott Reynen <scott at randomchaos.com> wrote:
> I'm a bit confused by this thread now, but it seems we agree that the
> current inability of publishers to indicate scope is a problem, and
> MFO is a potential solution.  Is that correct?  If so, I think we
> need to openly discuss the semantics of MFO (i.e. follow the process)
> before we get into a more limited discussion of how to parse MFO.  I
> don't think it's ready to parse at all yet, so I'm not sure why it's
> on -dev.

I moved my response to -dev since that's where Tantek tried to move it
earlier, twice I believe, and I don't see any particular reason to
disagree that.

MFO is only particular potential solution for a bigger problem which
you'll have to trace back through this discussion thread to read.
Briefly, there's problems reusing uF elements because they could
potentially be incorrectly associated with the wrong semantic object.

Regards, etc...

-- 
David Janes
Founder, BlogMatrix
http://www.blogmatrix.com
http://blogmatrix.blogmatrix.com