[uf-discuss] Microformats vs XML

Steven Livingstone connect at stevenR2.com
Thu Apr 27 04:48:24 PDT 2006

We may just be seeing this differently Karl, it's topical because it's all
about data formats (sure RDF can be much more). But maybe this is not the
place :)

> Unrelated.
I can't see why. The fundamental point is about ease of usage, not

> You could compare an
I agree. But a Microformat is what it is. You are unlikely to have an
application of hCard creating a new standard. Hence the simplicity.

I agree. Context is the key. I'm not arguing anything else. Hence why I do
also like standards.

> Web 2.0 is a marketing
Yes I know. But the first thing non-techhies will ask it what is it really
useful for and marketing it is the key. Web 2.0 seems to have worked

This could be recursive, but I do understand your viewpoint and think we are
maybe talking about different aspects of the same thing.


-----Original Message-----
From: microformats-discuss-bounces at microformats.org
[mailto:microformats-discuss-bounces at microformats.org] On Behalf Of Karl
Sent: 27 April 2006 12:26
To: connect at stevenR2.com
Cc: 'Microformats Discuss'
Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Microformats vs XML

Off List because off topic

Le 06-04-27 à 20:16, Steven Livingstone a écrit :
> RSS (as an example) has remained very simple ever since it was  
> created and
> XML-RPC has also remained so along with many others. Sure, there  
> have been


> In contrast if you consider RDF, OWL etc - they are not  
> particularly easy to
> get running with. There is quite a learning curve, but having used  
> them for

Unrelated. You do not compare the same thing at all :)

You could compare an

	application of RDF
	Ex: FOAF, SKOS, RSS 1.0
	an application of XML
	Ex: XHTML, RSS 2.0, Atom

> The first paragraph of Uche Ogbuji's IBM article sums it up for me:
> http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-stand2.html

Put this first paragraph in the SGML community, and you will see the  
answers. Everything is a question of context.

> It's certainly nothing specific to Microformats, but more a web 2.0  
> view on
> things where simplicity is being particularly effective.

Web 2.0 is a marketing which became a social phenomenon. Not a  
Microformats are good for particular things. I didn't say the  
opposite. They have their issues and their benefits depending on the  


Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead
   QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/
      *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***

microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss at microformats.org

More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list