[uf-discuss] Non-HTTP/HTML microformats

[Luke Kanies]

On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, Dr. Ernie Prabhakar wrote:

> As Kevin said, this does sound very similar to what we're discussing
> over on microformats REST:
>
> http://microformats.org/wiki/rest/

Ah, thanks for the link.

> I apologize for jumping into this thread late, but I'm curious
> whether you *can't* use HTML, or just weren't planning to because you
> didn't have a web browser in the loop. If the latter, I would
> definitely encourage you to consider the XOXO option.   I actually
> think it would be straightforward to implement "REX" (REST-Enabled
> XHTML) on other transports, in which case it would be germaine on the
> microformats-rest list.

I think at this point I'm too ignorant to be making any kind of decisions.

Yeah, the reason that I wasn't planning on using HTML is because there
aren't any web browsers in the loop anywhere.  I can use whatever I want
because, well, I'm making it all up as I go.  At this point I'm still
collecting information, but the only thing pushing me towards anything like
HTML is the uf use of it.  I've got a colleague who distinctly dislikes the
HTMLy nature of uf and is so far pretty fond of RDF, but that's about all I
have so far.

I'm currently doing all communication over XMLRPC, but I'm sure it could
just as easily be REST, XMLRPC is just the first thing I got working
acceptably well.  One of my other limitations is that I'm writing a tool
that's responsible for managing systems from the most minimal installs, so
I'm doing everything I can to stick to libraries that ship with Ruby to
limit the list of prereqs that my users need in order to start managing
their systems.

-- 
I am a kind of paranoiac in reverse. I suspect people of plotting
to make me happy.                     --J. D. Salinger
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Luke Kanies | http://reductivelabs.com | http://madstop.com