[uf-discuss] Very basic question that is not in the FAQ

[Scott Reynen]

On Jun 22, 2006, at 9:46 AM, Tantek Çelik wrote:

> Hamper compared to what?

When I'm telling someone about microformats and they express concern  
that Technorati might try to control microformats as Microsoft or  
Google has been feared trying to control the web, or Apple trying to  
control podcasting, or UserLand trying to control RSS, I believe the  
answer influences people's interest in microformats.  I try to point  
to the CC license.  I avoid a curt "that's just FUD" (even if it is)  
because I find that insulting.  I find clarifying ownership works  
well in one-on-one discussion and I think it would work well on the  
website too.  If you disagree, fine.  I don't think it's going to  
make a big difference in the long run, and I didn't mean to suggest  
it would.  But I continue to believe clarifying ownership in advance  
would be an improvement.

> With all due respect Scott, if you consider the current adoption  
> rate of
> microformats to be "hampered", I would be curious to know what your
> expectations are.

Frankly, I don't think that's all due respect.  This appears to be a  
rhetorical question implying that my expectations are wildly  
unrealistic.  I made concrete suggestions about what I think would  
improve adoption of microformats.  I think I made it clear that I  
don't think corporate ownership is a valid concern, but I think it  
should be addressed nonetheless because it exists in the real world.   
And your response appears to me a defensive dismissal that does  
little to address my suggestion to clarify ownership before it  
becomes a concern.  Maybe people don't express this concern to you,  
but they express it to me, so I'm passing that along.  Don't shoot  
the messenger.

Here's an alternative suggestion: if the sponsorship isn't something  
that needs to be disclaimed, perhaps it shouldn't be on the  
"disclaimers" page:

http://microformats.org/wiki/Microformats:General_disclaimer

Peace,
Scott