[microformats-discuss] what gets pruned/closed, making existing web data useful

[Danny Ayers]

On 7/13/05, Tantek Çelik <tantek at cs.stanford.edu> wrote:
> On 7/13/05 7:52 AM, "Danny Ayers" <danny.ayers at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hmm, I'm sorry about my irritable reaction,
> 
> No apology necessary Danny.  I know you want to make all this stuff work.

Yup. Impatiently ;-)

> We do things like:
> 
>  1. pick unique root class names like vcard, vcalendar, hreview, xfolkentry,
> and let contained class names be defined by context if necessary.
> 
>  2. for the same concept, we use the same name.  we use "description" in
> hCalendar, and thus in hReview, and now in xFolks as well, rather than
> "description", and then "review-text", and then "extended".
> 
>  3. for different concepts, use different names.
> 
> We keep the number of vocabulary terms used as minimal as possible, as
> opposed to encouraging an explosion.  We re-use current terms whenever
> possible rather than reinventing new terms.

Interesting, that's quite algorithmic. Getting the microformat
designers and the parser-generators reading from the same script would
be nice ;-)

> > But that does mean there's a far higher premium on
> > those profile URIs
> 
> I don't understand what you mean by higher premium here.

The cost/benefit is levered, so from this point of view, (slightly
exagerrated), *with* profile URIs, the microformats represent valuable
data, *without* they're just noise.
 
> > than there would be for say building a stylish
> > microcontent viewer.
> 
> microcontent is meaningless if it's not built from one or more microformats.
> 
> This is why I prefer to focus the discussion on the microformats, rather
> than bandying about what is little more than a buzzword "microcontent".

Oops, sorry, that was a slip of the keys (que faux pas!!). What I was
trying to describe was something that just gave an immediate
representation of microformat data, rather than having mixed the data
with other material and made inferences based on the combination.
Errors in the former would generally be proportional from input to
output, in the latter...watch that sky!

Cheers,
Danny.

-- 

http://dannyayers.com