ryan at technorati.com
Fri Jun 2 15:30:59 PDT 2006
On Jun 2, 2006, at 1:55 PM, Hans Gerwitz wrote:
> Perhaps ironically, I would think that the "discussion log" portion
> of meeting minutes maps to hAtom.
> I've done a pretty exhaustive search on the history of VJOURNAL and
> hCalendar, and it looks like it was brought up last December by
> Tantek for consideration as a blog post format, and the
> WikiRemnants remain: <http://microformats.org/wiki/blog-post-
> Later, at the end of February Ryan added "make sure we explicitly
> disallow 'vjournal'" to the hCalendar page, but I can find no
> traces of a discussion around that. Perhaps there was an IRC session?
Actually, I think most of it was f2f, unfortunately we don't have a
log for that.
> I'm concerned that a "let's consider VJOURNAL for blog posts" ->
> "no, Atom entries are better" -> "alright, kill VJOURNAL" path was
> followed that never gave poor vjournal a chance to stand up and
> defend itself as a description of moments that should not be
> described as "published."
> Of course, I'm the new kid on the list, so I'm likely missing
Our reasoning behind dropping vjournal is this:
1. For the most part, vjournal and hatom cover the same ground.
2. vjournal was rejected in the hatom process
3. we don't want two ways to do the same thing
4. perhaps we should drop vjournal?
The only part that's up for debate is #1, and I, personally, think
that making that case would be pretty difficult, as I think there is
a significant overlap, with the divergences amounting to edge cases,
which we tend to no worry about.
More information about the microformats-discuss