[uf-discuss] Comments from IBM/Lotus rep about Microformats

Ryan Cannon ryan at ryancannon.com
Mon Dec 11 21:17:52 PST 2006

On Dec 11, 2006, at 11:43 PM, mikeschinkel at gmail.com wrote:
> Brian Suda wrote:
>> Microformats are meant as building blocks and they should be
>> able to be using independantly and together...
> If that is true, how can it be achieved without a disambiguation  
> conventions
> to keep official Microformats from conflicting with similar  
> "techniques."
> Or is it the view of the Microformat community that Microformats  
> will keep
> it's house clean and, because Microformats are the "anointed" ones  
> that it
> just "sucks to be the other guy?"

Since Microformats (capital-M) are based on research of current  
practice, I
think it's probably more helpful to think of techniques as proto- 

If the community is slow to develop a format that makes sense, we often
encourage authors to develop their own systems, which then can inform  
how a
format will function in the wild. This is where documentation and the
oft-belabored "process" becomes powerful. Although it can be annoying  
early-adopters and people who need solutions now, it creates strong  
once the issues are solidified.

Ryan Cannon

Interactive Developer
MSI Student, School of Information
University of Michigan

More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list