class="hack"? Re: [uf-discuss] Comments from IBM/Lotus repaboutMicroformats

Mike Schinkel mikeschinkel at
Mon Dec 11 20:02:23 PST 2006

Benjamin West wrote:
> Mike, this isn't quite true.  What's being prescribed are the 
> techniques.  Techniques using mechanisms already available in HTML.
> These are the same techniques that Microformateers apply to 
> well defined problems to create a microformat.  But just 
> because microformats are a notable use case for these 
> techniques doesn't mean that anything using those techniques 
> is a microformat.  What has been confirmed on the WHATWG list 
> are the techniques available to extend HTML.

Why do these discussions have to be so circular?!?  

Okay, fine, I'll agree with your clarification because your point is really
irrelevent to my concern.  But I'll this time use your clarification to
point out yet again that without a disambiguation process we'll have
Balkanization of these "techniques."

I don't care what we call them: "techniques" or "Microformats" or anything
else for that matter.  All I care is that we get a simple disambiguation
strategy included in the recommendation.

-Mike Schinkel

More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list