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

[Mike Schinkel]

>> I don't think anyone has said that. I certainly don't think people should
be encouraged to begin authoring before first understanding what the are nad
are not "allowed" to do (unless by "authoring" you mean "fill in a form and
let a machine do the authoring for you")

A form would be nice, but it takes time to develop and we can't expect they
will be developed before people are interested.  OTOH, most people can't
read a spec and make heads nor tails of it (I know that I struggle with W3C
specs), so there is "the spec" and then there is the "tutorial" (or
similar.)  All can be clearly linked from the mini-home page.

This is just like Creative Commons where they have the human readable
license and then you can see the lawyese if you really want. I've never even
looked at the lawyered one, have you?  I don't need to; the simple version
works much better for me and is all I need. Something that tells the average
Joe how to author in simple language with good examples is what will be most
beneficial for most people.

>> Reasonable, but it needs some content, so as not to appear dry and
unwelcoming.

Not to be contrary, but see "How Users Read on the Web[1]."  Content for
content sake is less than useful.  Google's home page is dry but it's used
by more people than any other (or if not, I don't know what is) because it
meets people's needs better than the alternative (or they would switch.)

>> Once they standard is set, the brainstorming (and related examples) is
only of archival interest.

Note that I said my list was just a set to start discussion, but...
Certainly the link can be removed, although it might be of interest to
people wanting to understand why decisions were made.  I don't have a strong
opinion to argue for it either way.

>> I note that your list does not include an explanation of Semantic
XHTML...

Again, as I said, my list was just a set to start discussion...


-Mike
----------
[1] http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9710a.html
 

-----Original Message-----
From: microformats-discuss-bounces at microformats.org
[mailto:microformats-discuss-bounces at microformats.org] On Behalf Of Andy
Mabbett
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 3:48 PM
To: Microformats Discuss
Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] hCalendar spec- no specification included!

In message <015201c6f199$23c9b5f0$2102fea9 at Guides.local>, Mike Schinkel
<mikeschinkel at gmail.com> writes

>others have
>said that they (think newbies would be) interested in authoring, not 
>the specification and I concur.

I don't think anyone has said that. I certainly don't think people should be
encouraged to begin authoring before first understanding what the are nad
are not "allowed" to do (unless by "authoring" you mean "fill in a form and
let a machine do the authoring for you")

At the very least they should be given the option of reading the spec before
they begin authoring - as is NOT the case with hCalendar, at present.

>What if we use a convention that the entry page (i.e.
>http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard) would be an index into a list of
>(psuedo) standardized sub pages so that it would be very people to find 
>what is important to them.

Reasonable, but it needs some content, so as not to appear dry and
unwelcoming.

> For example, is a list of potential sub pages:
[...]
>* Brainstorming (might be combined w/Discussion)

Once they standard is set, the brainstorming (and related examples) is only
of archival interest.

I note that your list does not include an explanation of Semantic XHTML...


--
Andy Mabbett
                Say "NO!" to compulsory ID Cards:  <http://www.no2id.net/>

                Free Our Data:  <http://www.freeourdata.org.uk>
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss at microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss