microformats vs. semantic XHTML (was Re: [uf-discuss]
Comments from IBM/Lotus rep about Microformats)
andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk
Tue Dec 12 14:20:56 PST 2006
In message <C1A415F7.82917%tantek at cs.stanford.edu>, Tantek Çelik
<tantek at cs.stanford.edu> writes
>A "microformat" is such because it is a use of semantic class names,
>etc. that IN PARTICULAR:
>1. Are designed according to microformat principles 
>2. Follow the microformats process 
Of all the definitions of microformats in circulation, including that on
the main uFs web page, I believe that I have yet to see one which makes
>Without those, all you have is semantic XHTML.
That's one opinion.
Another, for example, would be that any set of classes (and rels, or
whatever), used by a number of people, with various parsers and
aggregators, and marked up examples in the wild, constitute a de facto
The fact that the only such examples at present came about through the
current 'wiki'/ mailing list/ 'community' does not preclude it from
happening, elsewhere, in the future.
>I have on my to-do list to better document the principles, more
>thoroughly, etc., as well as update the process per what we have
>learned the past six months or so.
When you do, will the proposed changes be posted here or on the wiki,
for discussion by the 'community', or will they be, in effect, imposed?
>I will note that for now, much deeper explanations of the principles
>are actually presented in the numerous podcasts about microformats that
>have been published:
>I encourage everyone who has participated in this thread to listen to
Where are their text transcriptions?
* Say "NO!" to compulsory ID Cards: <http://www.no2id.net/>
* Free Our Data: <http://www.freeourdata.org.uk>
* Are you using Microformats, yet: <http://microformats.org/> ?
More information about the microformats-discuss