[microformats-discuss] microformats vs. other formats

Tantek Ç elik tantek at cs.stanford.edu
Wed Jul 13 08:03:03 PDT 2005

On 7/13/05 7:52 AM, "Carl Beeth" <carl.beeth at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 7/13/05, Tantek Çelik <tantek at cs.stanford.edu> wrote:
>> Why bother migrating?
> because it is the more semantic alternative?

I agree with your premise of more semantic being better.

But more semantic compared to what?

IMHO, XHTML1 + current microformats (hCard, hCalendar, hReview, RelTag,
xFolk, etc.) is already  *MUCH MORE* semantic than XHTML2 seeks to be.

> Don't get me wrong, I completely agree with the current microformat
> approach but I also think it is relevant to look a little ahead
> towards future standards and make sure they map on to each other.

It doesn't hurt to consider similar efforts for at least "conceptual" parity
where it helps the principles we have put forth.

> In this case it seems to map perfectly.

>From my discussions with key XHTML2 folks and key RDF folks at the WWW2005
conference, I must agree.

There is *far* more ability to reuse microformats in XHTML2 and RDF than any
kind of conflict per se.

In many ways, microformats may help provide a common way for folks to both
evolve current XHTML practices, and allow folks working with XHTML2, RDF
etc. to take better advantage of this "enhanced" XHTML that is being
published on the web today.



More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list