[uf-discuss] hCalendar spec- no specification included!
mikeschinkel at gmail.com
Wed Oct 18 16:14:13 PDT 2006
>> We can't expect people to use something for which there is no spec!
And we can't expect a form to be developed when there isn't a spec either.
>>>> 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.
>> Agreed. Did I say otherwise?
My memory was that you did. If you didn't, then forgive me for bringing it
>> Indeed. Did I ask for "content for content's sake"?
Honestly, as we are now spending more time on discussing our discussions, I
am starting to think we are just debating for the purpose debate. I think
it's time to wind down (my participation in) this thread.
From: microformats-discuss-bounces at microformats.org
[mailto:microformats-discuss-bounces at microformats.org] On Behalf Of Andy
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 5:40 PM
To: Microformats Discuss
Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] hCalendar spec- no specification included!
In message <000e01c6f2f5$e658b3c0$0702a8c0 at Guides.local>, Mike Schinkel
<mikeschinkel at gmail.com> writes
>>> I don't think anyone has said that. I certainly don't think people
>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,
It might be; note that I wasn't calling for one.
> but it takes time to develop and we can't expect they will be
>developed before people are interested.
We can't expect people to use something for which there is no spec!
>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
Agreed. Did I say otherwise?
>>> Reasonable, but it needs some content, so as not to appear dry and
>Not to be contrary, but see "How Users Read on the Web."
> Content for content sake is less than useful.
Indeed. Did I ask for "content for content's sake"?
>>> Once they standard is set, the brainstorming (and related examples)
>only of archival interest.
>Note that I said my list was just a set to start discussion
Note that I was discussing it.
>>> I note that your list does not include an explanation of Semantic
>Again, as I said, my list was just a set to start discussion...
Note that I wasn't criticising you for omitting it.
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
More information about the microformats-discuss