[admin] Declaring end of thread (was Re: [uf-discuss] Comments
from IBM/Lotus rep about Microformats)
Tantek Ç elik
tantek at cs.stanford.edu
Sat Dec 9 11:34:31 PST 2006
On 12/9/06 9:40 AM, "Scott Reynen" <scott at randomchaos.com> wrote:
> On Dec 9, 2006, at 10:45 AM, Elias Torres wrote:
>> However, more importantly, I need to find an
>> important enough instance of the so-called problem that needs us to
>> resolve the "general microformat(s)" case instead of hoping that if we
>> build it, they will come.
> Exactly. That's my primary concern with trying to solve this problem
> right now: building a solution around hypothetical publishing makes
> the solution more likely to fail when real publishing shows up.
This is the tip of the iceberg of the problems with this thread.
I am ending this thread of >50 messages now and am hoping to use it as both
a learning experience and example of what to avoid in order to improve the
signal to noise ratio on this list.
In no particular order:
1. Parsing is OFF-TOPIC for microformats-discuss. Such discussions belong
in microformats-dev. See the mailing-lists page on the wiki where this has
been documented for quite some time:
And then - if you are not actually working on (i.e. coding) a parser, then
please don't post until you are. Theoretical worries are not a priority.
2. Use real world examples for discussions. Throughout this thread there
have been numerous arguments based on strictly theoretical examples.
The problem is we can waste ALL our time from now until forever
discussing/worrying about theoretical examples and get nothing done.
Theoretical examples are the equivalent to a DOS attack on actually getting
I for one prefer to get things done and leave the theoretical examples for
the PhD authors of the future (no offense to PhD authors).
I've updated: http://microformats.org/wiki/mailing-lists#general_guidelines
3. Prefixing (e.g. "vcard-") has already been considered and rejected for
microformats in general. There have been deliberate exceptions made for one
microformat (hAtom). I'm not going to spend the time re-arguing this now -
I have added an item to my to-do list on the wiki to better document this.
4. Better "Subject" lines please. When you fork a thread or focus on a
specific subject, please update the Subject in the email. The vast majority
of the emails with subject "Comments from IBM/Lotus rep about Microformats)"
should have had some other subject line specific to the topic being
discussed. This is already documented in the mailing list polices, which I
request everyone on this list please go re-read:
Thanks everyone - let's all work together to improve the signal-to-noise
ratio on this list.
More information about the microformats-discuss