URI profiles [was RE: [uf-discuss] Comments from IBM/Lotus rep about Microformats]

[Elias Torres]

On 12/13/06, Andy Mabbett <andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
> In message <001601c71e8a$15fcd600$0201a8c0 at andrieuhome>, Joe Andrieu
> <joe at andrieu.net> writes
>
> >Which means that URI profiles are /effectively/ required if you want to
> >be assured that standards-compliant parsers will pick them up your
> >microformats.
> >
> >Yea!  I think profiles are great.  So, why not formalize the
> >requirement?
>
> 1)  If profiles are mandatory (or implicitly required by p*rser
> behaviour), what happens to people who cannot edit the "head" element
> (blog or CMS users, for instance)?

Didn't somebody proposed here or at WHATWG to have profile added to
any element in HTML? Would that solve the problem and limit the scope
of the usage of  a specific microformat?

>
> 2) Rather than having a profile for each uF (and, presumably,
> near-duplicate profiles for nested uFs such as geo or adr in hCard?) why
> not have one over-arching profile for all microformats?
>

Funny you say that since it's one of the biggest misconception of
Semantic Web ideas. That SW seeks to find a single ontology for all of
the data in the world. bleech. I wouldn't want such a beast.

> --
> Andy Mabbett
>             *  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/> ?
> _______________________________________________
> microformats-discuss mailing list
> microformats-discuss at microformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
>