Dr. Ernie Prabhakar
drernie at opendarwin.org
Tue Oct 25 12:57:22 PDT 2005
On Oct 25, 2005, at 12:23 PM, David Janes -- BlogMatrix wrote:
> NOTE: hAtom is pretty incomplete at this point (it takes time to
> get this stuff in), but the logic comes from the blog-post-
> brainstorming page, so have a look through that if you want to
> figure out what I'm talking about.
> If you have issues, drop them here  and I'll answer; the sooner
> the better, in fact, just in case I have to revisit decisions or
> I'm doing something totally retarded.
I have a semi-philosophical question: is the goal merely to
transcribe atom, or really to provide a generic container format that
happens to be atom-compatible?
When looking at your hatom proposal, it seem eerily similar to S5:
atomentry <-> slide
content <-> slidecontent
summary <-> handout
I'm all for NOT boiling the ocean, but these really seem like the
same cup of tea.
The only concrete suggestion is simply to drop "atom" from the names,
so we can reuse it more generically.
Does that seem plausible?
-- Ernie P.
Ernest N. Prabhakar, Ph.D. <drernie at opendarwin.org>
Ex-Physicist, Marketing Weenie, and Dilettante Hacker
Probe-Hacker blog: http://www.opendarwin.org/~drernie/
More information about the microformats-discuss