professional relations (was: XFN usage stats andRe:[uf-discuss]rel="muse" implies romantic relationship?)

Mike Schinkel mikeschinkel at
Wed Dec 20 16:57:08 PST 2006

Siegfried Gipp wrote:
> Am Samstag, 16. Dezember 2006 08:31 schrieb Mike Schinkel:
> > You are making an invalid assumption which is that 
> > I'm concerned about my markup. No, I'm not. I've 
> > concerned about the need for a standard to be 
> > created so that a body of knowledge and tools can 
> > be developed around that body of knowledge, and 
> > people will evangelize and a large number of people 
> > will implement.
> >
> > But that said, it's now clear to me that the microformat 
> > brand is not going to address my concern. No need to 
> > discuss any more; it's a dead issue.
> Are you sure? In any democracy a standard is a matter of 
> adoption. And microformats do have the potential to be widely 
> adopted. Although not for the majority of pages (at least not 
> within the next ten years). But that's not a matter of 
> microformats. It is simply that the majority of pages do not 
> care for semantic markup at all, so why should they care for 
> microformats? In an old-style page, marked up 100% vo visual 
> effect, microformats is not even thought of. Nevertheless, 
> and although microformats aren't perfect, it is still worth 
> the efford.

Thanks for the comment, but I wasn't able to figure out what point you were
trying to make. 

Were you saying that Microformats will develop to be a standard?  If that
was your point, I don't debate it; I expect it. But w/o disambiguation and a
way to scale of the process, I think it will create a mess.

Or are you saying that there won't be a mess because you don't think many
pages will use Microformats?  

Again, I'm rather confused on your point.

-Mike Schinkel

More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list