[uf-discuss] Visible Data...a Microformat requirement?
Dr. Ernie Prabhakar
drernie at opendarwin.org
Thu Oct 26 10:37:47 PDT 2006
On Oct 26, 2006, at 10:28 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote:
> In message <ECE2E018-7D8E-4D9F-B73C-81C4D23E14F3 at opendarwin.org>, Dr.
> Ernie Prabhakar <drernie at opendarwin.org> writes
>> As long as you don't call it a microformat, feel free to experiment.
> Why shouldn't he call it a microformat?
Sorry, I may have conflated too many issues. The point I wanted to
make (which I communicated poorly) is:
a) If he's committed to marking up *invisible* metadata that is
*only* for machine consumption, then [IMHO] that's beyond the scope
of what this group was constituted to do.
b) Conversely, if he's unsure whether the metadata *has* to be
invisible, then perhaps this is still a worthwhile discussion.
c) Either way, he's welcome to experiment with microformat-derived ideas
d) However, if the end result is *outside* the scope of how we as a
community understand microformats, don't expect to get a lot of
e) In particular, it would be confusing for him to call his proposal
a "microformat" if it did not go through the documented microformat
I apologize if that came across as needlessly confrontational.
-- Ernie P.
More information about the microformats-discuss