[uf-discuss] FYI: ModuleT Is Live

Ryan King ryan at technorati.com
Wed Jan 18 11:32:28 PST 2006

On Jan 18, 2006, at 9:32 AM, Kevin Lawver wrote:

> Hey all,
> 	We finally got our developer site launched with our microformat  
> for describing "modules" (widgets, gadgets, doo-dads, gee-gaws,  
> etc).  We incorporated all the feedback we got from the list into  
> the current version, and think it's working really well so far for  
> creating and deploying modules.  We're looking for feedback so if  
> you've got a couple minutes, please go check it out: http:// 
> iamalpha.com.

Its great that you guys are able to get this out from behind the  
firewall (so to speak). And its really great to see you guys willing  
and open to take feedback.

I know I've looked at the profile before, but reading it now I have  
some new bits of feedback (shoulda thought of them earlier):

1. You have:

> description
> A short, user-readable (ie: not overly technical) description of  
> the module and what it does.
> detail
> A more detailed description of a module capabilities and requirements.

Why not reuse summary/description, as we have in other microformats?  
By reusing you can reduce the vocabulary (total across all µf's),  
prevent misunderstandings and use other microformats as normative  
references (ie, you don't have to define what a 'description' is,  
because we already have that defined elsewhere).

2. You have:

> liquid
> The module should expand to fill all usable space (ie: it has no  
> set width)
> default-width
> The default width, in pixels.
> minimum-width
> The minimum width, in pixels, the module will fit in.

Aren't these style/presentation issues? In other words, shouldn't  
these be taken care of by CSS?

3. You have:

> head
> The heading of a module. If your module doesn't have a title or any  
> heading information, it's not required. This should also be a  
> <div>, and if it contains heading text, it should be contained in  
> an <h3>. This class must be within one of the containers: edit or  
> module.
> body
> This is the "meat" of the module. Can contain any markup, but it  
> shouldn't reuse the "module", "head" or "body" classes. This class  
> must be within one of the containers: edit or module.

Eh, I don't understand what's going on here. If I understand things  
correctly, these widget/module things are full xhtml documents. So,  
why reinvent stuff?

4. More:

> foot
> A footer for a module. Must always be within one of the containers:  
> edit or module.

You might want to look at HTML5 as a place where this is already  
defined. Though HTML5 is still a draft, it could still be useful to  
borrow its semantics.

5. License:

> license
> A link to the license for this module.

You should reference rel-license here [http://microformats.org/wiki/ 

6. author stuff:

> mail
> Author's e-mail address, or support address.
> author
> URL of Author's website.

<address> + hcard ?

Once again, sorry for not giving feedback earlier (ie, before you  
guys went fully public with this).

You guys really have some cool stuff here and I really hope you can  
collaborate with the other widget and module vendors. It'd be shame  
to have a proliferation of formats for this stuff (wait, we kinda  
already do).

Keep up the good work!

Ryan King
ryan at technorati.com

More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list