[uf-discuss] hCalendar spec- no specification included!
andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk
Mon Oct 16 11:30:02 PDT 2006
In message <C159138D.7D909%tantek at cs.stanford.edu>, Tantek Çelik
<tantek at cs.stanford.edu> writes
>On 10/16/06 10:38 AM, "Andy Mabbett" <andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
>> I've just been introducing a colleague to the concept of hCalendar; and
>> referred her to:
>> She was baffled; not lest because, though the page had a treatise on
>> "Semantic XHTML Design Principles", it didn't list the hCalendar fields,
>> let alone say which are mandatory and which are optional!
>> I have started to rewrite the page, but welcome contributions.
>Andy, it is actually a bit inappropriate to jump-in and rewrite a spec
>that is that well established without at least discussing how to
>rewrite it first,
Really? I thought that was the whole point of a Wiki. Note also that I
"rewrite a spec", I reordered the preamble to it and attempted to
> or emailing the editor at a minimum.
And ether was me thinking that you'd disclaimed ownership of uFs.
>There has already been work towards making the specifications more
It's well hidden.
>and I've documented this task on the to-do page here.
You did so *after* I made the changes referred to above.
>I'm going to revert the reorganizational changes you made to both hCard
>and hCalendar for now,
>and would ask that you please refrain from doing so single-handedly.
I haven't dome anything "single-handedly". You quote me asking for
>Please raise suggestions here on the list first and let's discuss them.
>For established specifications in particular (and perhaps any with an
>"editor"), we really should respect that role
And where is that role defined?
>until/unless it actually proves to be a hindrance (which it hasn't so
It just has. HTH.
>Thanks much for your understanding,
Once again, your tone is objectionable.
Say "NO!" to compulsory ID Cards: <http://www.no2id.net/>
Free Our Data: <http://www.freeourdata.org.uk>
More information about the microformats-discuss