[admin] Re: general purpose (was Re: [uf-discuss] Hello /
Semantically-Interlinked Online Communities (SIOC))
Tantek Ç elik
tantek at cs.stanford.edu
Tue Nov 8 15:35:04 PST 2005
On 11/8/05 3:09 PM, "David Janes -- BlogMatrix" <davidjanes at blogmatrix.com>
> Karl Dubost wrote:
>> Le 05-11-07 à 11:51, Tantek Çelik a écrit :
>>>> Disambiguation of names
>>>> (attribute values) within a document is achieved through (for want of
>>>> a better phrase) Intelligent Design, i.e. the 'approved' microformats
>>>> are constructed with the prior intention that naming clashes won't
>>> A better way of putting this is that the disambiguation is achieved
>>> the social design of having a *very* open community (microformats.org)
>> being a very open community, unfortunately doesn't necessary address
>> universality. I wish it was another way. But yes the openness is a key
>> and an advantage.
> I think this speaks to one of the mental leaps that people have to make
> when coming to this community: Microformats are *not* a general purpose
> mechanism for expressing arbitrary semantic data in XHTML; thus, the
> issue of universality doesn't come up too often!
David is precisely correct.
In fact, excerpted from the about page:
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.
This is one of the *strengths* of microformats.
Some might paraphrase it as "keeping it real".
There are other forums elsewhere where folks spend inorderinate amounts of
time discussing general purpose universal solutions to problems of
This is not the forum for that and frankly, even the discussion of whether
we should be pursuing general purpose universality or not is an-off topic
rathole that is to be avoided on the microformats-* lists.
More information about the microformats-discuss