[uf-discuss] eRDF <=> microformats?
elias at torrez.us
Wed May 31 11:02:06 PDT 2006
In the past it has been considered off-topic, but I don't know of
another public place for us to discuss this. I guess the RDFa mailing
list would be a good place, but I'm more looking for a response from the
Dr. Ernie Prabhakar wrote:
> Hi all,
> I apologize if this might be off-topic, but I'm honestly curious and
> would like to understand this better:
> (+) follows the microformats principles
> From my admittedly naive perspective, eRDF looks like it *could* be used
> in a way that is compatible with microformats. That is, not *all* eRDF
> schemas and documents *are* necessarily microformats, but many of them
> _could_ be. Conversely, it seems like _most_ microformats could be
> described using eRDF schemas.
> Is that true? If so, what is the dividing line?
> -- Ernie P.
> P.S. For what its worth, this seems _way_ more promising to me than RDFa.
Ernie, I think that we are all arriving at the same conclusions and the
technical details are not the most interesting. RDFa folks know their
technical challenges and are working to fix them, eRDF is a very good
alternative, but I don't care about the specific technology but that we
can come to an agreement and a story that can grow with the needs.
You are welcome to join the discussion , however I'm a bit
dissapointed with the lack of response.
> Ernest N. Prabhakar, Ph.D. <drernie at opendarwin.org>
> Ex-Physicist, Marketing Weenie, and Dilettante Hacker
> Probe-Hacker blog: http://www.opendarwin.org/~drernie/
> microformats-discuss mailing list
> microformats-discuss at microformats.org
More information about the microformats-discuss