[uf-discuss] RFC: Proposal for general purpose microformat

[Scott Reynen]

Abramo Bagnara wrote:

> I feel a subtle hostility wrt this improvement attempt, I'm wrong?

I suspect many here are tired of fending off attempt after attempt at  
generalization, as such attempts tend to come at a cost of simplicity  
(and therefor adoption).

Less than a month ago [1], Tantek wrote:

>   microformats are not:
>     * infinitely extensible and open-ended
>     * a panacea for all taxonomies, ontologies, and other such  
> abstractions
>     * defining the whole world, or even just boiling the ocean
>
> So yes, such "general purpose" or "universality" is an explicit NON- 
> goal.

You can read through the archives for a few dozen explanations of  
this perspective.

Peace,
Scott

[1] http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-discuss/2005- 
November/001904.html