[uf-discuss] Size considerations

Mike Schinkel mikeschinkel at gmail.com
Wed Oct 18 16:14:13 PDT 2006

Has there been any thought to try and survey the web development community
at large on these types of issues?  I could see the value of having a lot of
these types of questions answered if we were do present surveys (of course
hopefully we could find a surveying expert to help us make sure we were
writing our questions so as not to bias the answers.)

We might be able to get places like SitePoint to promote the surveys if we
created them.

Just a thought?


-----Original Message-----
From: microformats-discuss-bounces at microformats.org
[mailto:microformats-discuss-bounces at microformats.org] On Behalf Of Charles
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 2:17 PM
To: Microformats Discuss
Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

Scott Reynen wrote:
> I agree with all of this, but I think a more fundamental issue is that 
> this problem is always presented as a hypothetical, and we shouldn't 
> spend out time trying to solve hypothetical problems.  We know 
> readability is a problem when someone can't understand something.  
> We'll know size is a problem when someone says they can't implement 
> microformats due to size.  No one has ever said that, as far as I know.

It's hypothetical because not many people are using microformats yet. 
However, we *do* know that people are concerned with file sizes and html
bloat as this was one of the main selling points of switching to tableless
CSS designs was that of reducing file size [1].

Javascripters also go to extreme lengths to compress their large libraries,
often using cryptic variable and object names to shave off a few more bytes.
The (lack of) size in a js library has become a feature. 
I don't happen agree with the practice of sacrificing readability for file
size and others seem to agree [2].

[1] http://www.stopdesign.com/articles/throwing_tables/
[2] http://tinyurl.com/y2twvy

The thing is, I don't think it's as black or white as saying one can/can't
implement microformats due to size. Size should be a *consideration*,
surely, and compromises need to be made. I just think, given the balance of
pros and cons for longer, more readable, attributes, I'd go with longer.



Charles Roper
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss at microformats.org

More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list