[uf-discuss] use existing before proposing new

[Andy Mabbett]

In message <C13C51DE.7BB37%tantek at cs.stanford.edu>, Tantek Çelik
<tantek at cs.stanford.edu> writes

>> I came here some months ago, lurked, posted a few minor
>> comments and lots of questions; marked up some test microformats, asked
>> for feedback, applied fixes, iterated, marked-up a quantity of real
>> data,
>
>Cool.  Just to be sure - did you add the pages you marked up to the
>"Examples in the Wild" sections of the respective specifications?

Yes (I've not done so for the (relatively recent) hAtom pages, yet,
because I want to do further work and testing on it, first).

>I'm thinking were we to adopt this modification to the process that
>that (adding links to examples in the wild to the wiki) would be the
>concrete measurable aspect of this requirement.

It would measure that the page has microformats, it would not measure
that they were put there by the person claiming so.

>> proposed two simple replications/ adaptations of an existing
>> format, and ONLY THEN proposed the format ("species"), the desire for
>> which had first led me to look for something like microformats in the
>> first place.
>
>Excellent.
>
>Did you find it to be useful/educational to go through the process of
>marking up and publishing real data with existing microformats?

Of course.

>> That said, you can't stop someone from saying "Hey, I think we need a
>> microformat for X"; doubly so in a supposedly *open* standards
>> community.
>
>Of course not, but we can help steer people towards being more
>effective with their microformat ideas and proposals, which is a
>primary goal of the process.

Then simply *suggest* that people use microformats before proposing
them, as part of the "process".

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

                Free Our Data:  <http://www.freeourdata.org.uk>