[uf-discuss] Authority (was: Text::Microformat - a uf parser for
jeremy at adactio.com
Fri Apr 27 08:22:03 PDT 2007
Keith Grennan wrote:
>> I agree. I really hope "microformat" won't turn into just another
>> term for "semantic HTML." Clear communication is difficult enough
>> already without additional ambiguity.
> I think it already has.
> It's like Adobe trying to control how people use the word 'photoshop'.
It certainly seems to be heading that way. But now that we recognise
this problem (it was discussed quite a bit at the microformats dinner
in SF recently), we can't try to take steps to help clarify the
situation. POSH advocacy is a good start. It may be a silly name but
it's an important step in making it clear that microformats are
narrowly defined but built on top of semantic markup -- a much wider
> As the popularity of the term microformat grows, you might have to
> for higher ground that's easier to defend. Because really, who
> wants to
> spend their time and energy being language police?
I hope it won't come to that but you're right about the language
police: I feel like I've spent most of today blogging, leaving
comments and responding to emails in an attempt to set people
straight on what does and doesn't constitute a microformat. But like
I said, at least now that we recognise the problem, we can make a
concerted effort to deal with it. I hope that work won't be Sisyphean.
> ps. I realize that I'm a newcomer to this community, so I hope I'm not
> offending anyone. Hopefully my comments are valuable as an outsider's
> first impression.
As an newcomer, your comments are probably the most valuable and
relevant on this issue. Much appreciated.
a d a c t i o
More information about the microformats-discuss