wiki-thon? Re: [uf-discuss] Microformats.org usability review
scott at randomchaos.com
Thu Feb 9 06:03:16 PST 2006
On Feb 9, 2006, at 3:26 AM, Tantek Çelik wrote:
> And those are also some direct summaries of the principles. These
> are the
> heart of what microformats are and thus I don't think it makes
> sense to
> change this statement at all unless you can think of a better way
> to express
> the principles in a succinct human-readable statement.
I don't think someone new to microformats cares about principles.
They're interested in what microformats can do for them. The
principles come into play when designing a new microformat more than
implementing an existing microformat. I suspect 90% of people
reading the intro paragraph are considering implementing an existing
microformat. They already have human-readable content, and they are
wondering if it's worth the effort to make it machine-readable with
microformats. The intro doesn't even hint at answering this basic
question, and I think this is a mistake.
Certainly Firefox was built upon some fundamental design principles,
but those don't appear in the intro paragraph :
"The award-winning Web browser is better than ever. Browse the Web
with confidence - Firefox protects you from viruses, spyware and pop-
ups. Enjoy improvements to performance, ease of use and privacy. It's
easy to import your favorites and settings and get started. Download
Firefox now and get the most out of the Web."
No mention of open source, cross-platform, modular design, nor open
standards. Just how will this help the reader. Same with Atom :
"Atom is a simple way to read and write information on the web,
allowing you to easily keep track of more sites in less time, and to
seamlessly share your words and ideas by publishing to the web."
More information about the microformats-discuss