[uf-discuss] hCalendar spec- no specification included!

Tantek Ç elik tantek at cs.stanford.edu
Mon Oct 16 12:13:50 PDT 2006

On 10/16/06 11:53 AM, "Andy Mabbett" <andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:

>> If you can be specific about *which* pages, and what about them are
>> hard to understand, that would be very helpful.
> Here's a hint: most people new to hCalendar (some of them, it will
> apparently come as a surprise to you, not bloggers) are likely to want
> to know from what components an hCalendar consists of,

That is very reasonable, the right thing to do then is to add a section
similar to the section in hCard which serves that purpose, *without doing
any other changes*.

> before they read
> your name twice, view two links to your day-job, or see you bigging-up
> your friends; you appear to believe that the opposite is the case.

Andy, please reread:


for what my current thoughts are on section organization, rather than
implying/inferring from a single instance.

As far as the default order of editor, author, copyright etc., I *strongly*
recommend you read some W3C specs to get an understanding of what "typical"
web standards specifications look like.  As with many things, with
microformats we have re-used some of the organizational/sectional ordering
of what others' have done rather than invent our own.  Start with the W3C's
Technical Reports page and just read some of the documents there:


E.g. http://w3.org/TR/html401 or http://w3.org/TR/CSS21

> Neither are they likely to want to re-read a tedious and barely-relevant
> essay on XML, complete with misleading advice.

Please note that specifications are not tutorials, and attempting to make
them into tutorials is very bad for precision and interoperability.

If you have specific issues about the semantic XHTML section, please raise
them in a separate thread.

> BTW, I'm now asking you for the *fifth* time, to answer my question
> about "species" examples.

I for one have not had the time to read through your species examples in
order to answer your question.

Perhaps consider kindly asking the list what the community as a whole thinks
of your work on species, but I ask that you first wait for the discussion of
what new list to create for "new microformats" concludes.  In the meantime,
please add your opinion on the name of the list to the proposal:




More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list