[uf-discuss] Microformats vs XML

[Steven Livingstone]

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
technologies.

> 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
somewhat.

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

Steven
http://stevenR2.com

-----Original Message-----
From: microformats-discuss-bounces at microformats.org
[mailto:microformats-discuss-bounces at microformats.org] On Behalf Of Karl
Dubost
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

and

> 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
with
	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  
technology.
Microformats are good for particular things. I didn't say the  
opposite. They have their issues and their benefits depending on the  
context.


-- 


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
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss