[uf-discuss] Format-of-Formats?

[Joe Reger, Jr.]

Gotcha... sorry for the intrusion... didn't want to stir things up..
it certainly is a big challenge.  A gentleman on SB recommended
Microcontent Description (MCD) as a starting point.  Ernie, if you're
up for it, I'd be interested in getting something going.  I think this
list is the place to do it but I certainly respect Tantak's desire to
avoid the quagmire!  Maybe a sub-list of some sort that Ernie and I
moderate?  Best,  Joe

On 3/30/06, Dr. Ernie Prabhakar <drernie at opendarwin.org> wrote:
> Hi Joe,
>
> > Is this format-of-formats already done?  If so, I apologize, can you
> > point me to it?  If not, what has been done and would it be premature
> > for me to start work on such a draft specification (after much
> > feedback from everybody here, of course)?
>
> This is actually an FAQ, and a fairly tricky one at that, since it is
> isomorphic to the problem of a "general purpose parser."  I believe
> Tantek has declared that discussion off-topic for this list, since it
> has the potential to be a never-ending rathole.  However, I can't
> find such a statement on the FAQ:
>
> http://microformats.org/wiki/faq#Basic_Microformat_Questions
>
> Tantek, is that in fact the policy, and is it documented somewhere?
>
> That said, there are a few of us crazy enough to want to try, which
> I'm open to doing off-list if you're interested...
>
> -- Ernie P.
>
>
> On Mar 30, 2006, at 8:45 AM, Joe Reger, Jr. wrote:
>
> > Hi All!
> >
> > I've been lurking for a while and truly appreciate all of the great
> > work going into microformats right now!
> >
> > I saw a message on the Structured Blogging mailing list that got me
> > thinking about a format-of-formats... a standard way to describe a
> > format.  My thoughts are here:
> >
> > http://www.joereger.com/entry-logid7-eventid5003-Structured-
> > Blogging-FormatofFormats.log
> >
> > As I posted, I realized that I haven't checked in with Tantek and
> > others regarding the concept of a format-of-formats.  I've seen a lot
> > of Atom/RDF used.  I was a proponent of XML Schema a while back.  I've
> > been dabbling with Xforms.  XUL is out there.
> >
> > My basic position is that we should be able to provide a common format
> > for the description of a microformat.  By creating a standard to
> > describe the formats we free toolmakers to create an implementation
> > and then be done with it.  Once we have support from WordPress, MT,
> > Drupal, LJ, etc then we can spawn microformats more quickly, requiring
> > little or no development on the toolmaker part.  Toolmakers will
> > compete by providing advanced features in their implementation (like
> > CSS override hooks, see blog post).  Aggregators like
> > Technorati/PubSub will be able to build advanced functionality on top
> > of specific formats and will compete at that level.  For example,
> > Technorati may create Technorati Music while PubSub may create PubSub
> > Movies... their investment differentiates and end-users win.
> >
> > Is this format-of-formats already done?  If so, I apologize, can you
> > point me to it?  If not, what has been done and would it be premature
> > for me to start work on such a draft specification (after much
> > feedback from everybody here, of course)?
> >
> > Thanks for getting me up to speed!  Keep up the great work!
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Joe Reger
> > _______________________________________________
> > microformats-discuss mailing list
> > microformats-discuss at microformats.org
> > http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> microformats-discuss mailing list
> microformats-discuss at microformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
>