From kevinmarks at mac.com Thu Feb 1 02:36:03 2007 From: kevinmarks at mac.com (Kevin Marks) Date: Thu Feb 1 02:36:13 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Microformats, WebApps 1.0 and UI widgets in browsers In-Reply-To: <8434A459-7C78-42F8-BEF6-98E6F0A5D040@w3.org> References: <8434A459-7C78-42F8-BEF6-98E6F0A5D040@w3.org> Message-ID: On Jan 31, 2007, at 11:25 PM, Karl Dubost wrote: > At first, I say ?cool, very cool!?. Then, taking a step back, > I think what about the documents which have been created for the > last 15 years before microformats effort existed. These documents > contain class names which are probably and most certainly very > similar to some values defined by microformats community. Karl, can you document instances of use of 'vcard', 'vevent', 'hfeed,' 'hresume', 'hreview' etc before microformats defined them? Very similar isn't an issue; exactly identical is. From laurentwalter.goix at telecomitalia.it Thu Feb 1 03:02:28 2007 From: laurentwalter.goix at telecomitalia.it (Goix Laurent Walter) Date: Thu Feb 1 03:02:37 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] hMood/hPresence? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Ideally we could end up one global Presence protocol, but SIMPLE and XMPP are already competing in different worlds...and their not using the same concepts for moods and activities... Anyway, the suggestion of using tags for representing mood is the least that we can do, but it's very hard to hook up to semantics and know that "happy" actually means that the blogger felt "happy". Using the href as way of representing semantics is a very loose approach since it means that all should use the same link (that somehow represents a concept semantically), which is quite hard to achieve, if we want some crawler or plugin to parse the 'mood' information. Instead, having a specific microformat would intrinsically add semantics to the word... walter -----Original Message----- From: microformats-discuss-bounces@microformats.org [mailto:microformats-discuss-bounces@microformats.org] On Behalf Of Colin Barrett Sent: mercoled? 31 gennaio 2007 18.57 To: Microformats Discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] hMood/hPresence? On Jan 31, 2007, at 9:26 AM, Sam Sethi wrote: > Personally I hope XMPP becomes the interoperable standard for > presence and > then we an build apps on top of this? Twitter, Gmail and Joost are > all using > XMPP and this potentially will allow me to set my presence, mood and > status > in one app and have it ripple through to the others. I sure hope so. As an IM client developer (I work on Adium in my free time), I would absolutely love it if XMPP were used more -- it's an open standard which helps a lot during protocol implementation. It's not quite as nice as it could be, since XMPP is by definition highly extensible and it's feature set is vast. Trying to develop against a large, moving standard is not the most fun thing to do -- although it's a different type of not-fun from picking apart OSCAR packets. ;) Investigating embedding microformats into XMPP is something that people have talked a lot about, but nobody has really done. As usual, it's those darn existing implementations that we shouldn't break that get in the way of progress ;) -Colin (FWIW, there is/was an effort to develop a framework on OS X[1] for unified presence and messaging on that desktop, but development has sputtered and it's not really moving forward). [1] http://chatkit.net _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss -------------------------------------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the persons above and may contain confidential information. If you have received the message in error, be informed that any use of the content hereof is prohibited. Please return it immediately to the sender and delete the message. Should you have any questions, please contact us by replying to webmaster@telecomitalia.it. Thank you www.telecomitalia.it -------------------------------------------------------------------- From fberriman at gmail.com Thu Feb 1 04:13:18 2007 From: fberriman at gmail.com (Frances Berriman) Date: Thu Feb 1 04:13:21 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] hMood/hPresence? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 01/02/07, Goix Laurent Walter wrote: > Anyway, the suggestion of using tags for representing mood is the least that we can do, but it's very hard to hook up to semantics and know that "happy" actually means that the blogger felt "happy". Using the href as way of representing semantics is a very loose approach since it means that all should use the same link (that somehow represents a concept semantically), which is quite hard to achieve, On a philosophical note - that assumes your experience of happy is my experience of happy. :) And yeah, I agree, it is hard to achieve. But for the specific problem of "mood", an ultimately objective topic, I think the ambiguity of the actual meaning of a specific mood is acceptable. Although, I think I missed your point first time I read it, so going back to the topic at hand - would something like happy be better? -- Frances Berriman http://fberriman.com From mail at ciaranmcnulty.com Thu Feb 1 04:36:46 2007 From: mail at ciaranmcnulty.com (Ciaran McNulty) Date: Thu Feb 1 04:36:51 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Should microformat features (like rel-tag) have explicit scope? In-Reply-To: <45C15975.6060304@pallas.us> References: <45C15975.6060304@pallas.us> Message-ID: On 2/1/07, Derrick Lyndon Pallas wrote: > If I have a parser that only knows (and only cares about) the rel-tag > format, it will be confused by people that use rel-tag for the category > property in hCard. It seems unreasonable that every microformat should > have to know about every other microformat, especially when they are nested. Can I ask what the confusion is? If I have a hcard with a rel-tag indicating 'football' in that hCard, then the naive interpretation that 'this page has something on it to do with football' that your parser will take from it is probably correct. -Ciaran McNulty From laurentwalter.goix at telecomitalia.it Thu Feb 1 06:25:40 2007 From: laurentwalter.goix at telecomitalia.it (Goix Laurent Walter) Date: Thu Feb 1 06:25:47 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] hMood/hPresence? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: [snip] Although, I think I missed your point first time I read it, so going back to the topic at hand - would something like happy be better? [walter] i believe if no one is interested in a hMood, or hPresence, that would be my fallback choice, since this is already implementable. I would have hoped for some more structure and semantics, but it may not gather enough interest for the time being. -- Frances Berriman http://fberriman.com _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss -------------------------------------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the persons above and may contain confidential information. If you have received the message in error, be informed that any use of the content hereof is prohibited. Please return it immediately to the sender and delete the message. Should you have any questions, please contact us by replying to webmaster@telecomitalia.it. Thank you www.telecomitalia.it -------------------------------------------------------------------- From karl at w3.org Thu Feb 1 07:09:31 2007 From: karl at w3.org (Karl Dubost) Date: Thu Feb 1 07:09:43 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Microformats, WebApps 1.0 and UI widgets in browsers In-Reply-To: References: <8434A459-7C78-42F8-BEF6-98E6F0A5D040@w3.org> Message-ID: <39DEB0F6-C124-4A17-B8C9-FC44D7EF252F@w3.org> Le 1 f?vr. 2007 ? 19:36, Kevin Marks a ?crit : > On Jan 31, 2007, at 11:25 PM, Karl Dubost wrote: >> At first, I say ?cool, very cool!?. Then, taking a step >> back, I think what about the documents which have been created for >> the last 15 years before microformats effort existed. These >> documents contain class names which are probably and most >> certainly very similar to some values defined by microformats >> community. > > Karl, can you document instances of use of 'vcard', 'vevent', > 'hfeed,' 'hresume', 'hreview' etc before microformats defined them? Agreed on that. Notice that you selected some specific class names. > Very similar isn't an issue; exactly identical > is._______________________________________________ What I'm stressing out is that some class names if they trigger some UI behaviour will indeed make troubles. hCalendar: "description", "summary", "category", "location", "status", "last-modified" hCard: "adr", "street-address", "email", "geo", etc. and plenty others. You seem to have missed the bit where I was saying that any mechanisms for switching being a specific class surrounding class names, a profile URI attribute, etc would be fine. In my pages for example, I have started to change my instances of title for titre, and author to auteur, because I do not want to have to trigger something I didn't want. See it from a CSS point of view: * The owner of the page can choose the CSS properties associated to a series of class names. * The reader can override properties with his/her own stylesheet. * The browser does not trigger a style by itself without people choosing it. If you read carefully my message, I'm not saying "bad", I'm saying "be careful". -- Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/ W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/ *** Be Strict To Be Cool *** From charles.roper at gmail.com Thu Feb 1 07:31:50 2007 From: charles.roper at gmail.com (Charles Roper) Date: Thu Feb 1 07:32:09 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Species microformat process In-Reply-To: References: <8ad71be30701300934t2ee67302j787b289ac595ac43@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Scott and Colin, many thanks for your replies; your feedback is much appreciated. On 31/01/07, Scott Reynen wrote: > So the important question is: what will it take to > get publishers publishing the kind of species markup you'd like to see? That's a great question. I guess it's harder for publishers to see the benefit of species for their end users than it is for hCard, hReview, hCalendar et al. I mean, it's fairly apparent what the benefit, or application, of these may be, but with species it's not so obvious. But there are also uFs that aren't so obvious: XOXO, rel-tag, XFN spring to mind. The actual end uses for these seem (to me, at least) rather less immediately clear, but they're valuable nonetheless. Having said this, I'm intrigued as to why no one has answered Mike Schinkel's question on the XOXO faq: http://snipurl.com/18yvu, as it seems like a question worth answering; I'd certainly like to know the answer to that one. :) > The "cowpaths" here is the data. Microformats, the > "paving," is the standardized markup. If the markup were already > standardized, there would be no need for microformats. But if the > data isn't already commonly published, it doesn't matter how nice the > markup is. Ah-ha! That's the crucial point I was missing; thanks for clearing it up in my mind. So with species, the cowpaths are simply the variety of ways in which a species name is published on a page. The paving is the standardised markup we create to wrap around those instances. That being the case, and given the copious quantity of examples on the examples page: http://microformats.org/wiki/species-examples And examples regrouped: http://microformats.org/wiki/species-examples-regrouped What does the community feel should be the focus for species at present? Now that I know that the analysis of existing practice is about the existing *content* rather than existing *markup*, I'm less inclined to say the existing proposal is *over*complex. Sure, it looks complex to the untrained eye because the taxonomic hierarchy *is* complex, but then so is the full hCard spec. My own view is that because species is an extraction of the existing Linnaen taxonomic hierarchy ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linnaen_taxonomy ... its complexity is justified, surely? I'm still able to be persuaded either way on this one, though, should a compelling argument arise. Cheers, Charles -- Charles Roper www.sxbrc.org.uk From lists at ben-ward.co.uk Thu Feb 1 07:32:22 2007 From: lists at ben-ward.co.uk (Ben Ward) Date: Thu Feb 1 07:32:56 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Microformats, WebApps 1.0 and UI widgets in browsers In-Reply-To: <39DEB0F6-C124-4A17-B8C9-FC44D7EF252F@w3.org> References: <8434A459-7C78-42F8-BEF6-98E6F0A5D040@w3.org> <39DEB0F6-C124-4A17-B8C9-FC44D7EF252F@w3.org> Message-ID: Hi Karl On 1 Feb 2007, at 15:09, Karl Dubost wrote: > hCalendar: "description", "summary", "category", "location", > "status", "last-modified" > hCard: "adr", "street-address", "email", "geo", etc. > and plenty others. > > You seem to have missed the bit where I was saying that any > mechanisms for switching being a specific class surrounding class > names, a profile URI attribute, etc would be fine. > I'm not sure I see the problem here. Those class names are indeed generic and used all over the web, but they should only trigger user interface enhancements when they are children of ?vcard?, ?vevent?, ?hatom?, ?hatom? elements. UI would surely only respond to valid and complete microformats on a page, not the sub-parts of them. > In my pages for example, I have started to change my instances of > title for titre, and author to auteur, because I do not want to > have to trigger something I didn't want. Again, unless I've missed something in the above, that isn't necessary as those title and author class names are children of an appropriate microformat parent element, so would be ignored by a microformats parser. Please could you elaborate if I've misunderstood the implications of your concern. Kind regards, Ben From davidjanes at blogmatrix.com Thu Feb 1 07:33:28 2007 From: davidjanes at blogmatrix.com (David Janes) Date: Thu Feb 1 07:33:35 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Microformats, WebApps 1.0 and UI widgets in browsers In-Reply-To: <39DEB0F6-C124-4A17-B8C9-FC44D7EF252F@w3.org> References: <8434A459-7C78-42F8-BEF6-98E6F0A5D040@w3.org> <39DEB0F6-C124-4A17-B8C9-FC44D7EF252F@w3.org> Message-ID: <21e523c20702010733w25ec4dc8k46fd405901fea0d0@mail.gmail.com> On 2/1/07, Karl Dubost wrote: > > Le 1 f?vr. 2007 ? 19:36, Kevin Marks a ?crit : > > On Jan 31, 2007, at 11:25 PM, Karl Dubost wrote: > >> At first, I say "cool, very cool!". Then, taking a step > >> back, I think what about the documents which have been created for > >> the last 15 years before microformats effort existed. These > >> documents contain class names which are probably and most > >> certainly very similar to some values defined by microformats > >> community. > > > > Karl, can you document instances of use of 'vcard', 'vevent', > > 'hfeed,' 'hresume', 'hreview' etc before microformats defined them? > > Agreed on that. > Notice that you selected some specific class names. The specific class names are "root" class names. Non-root class names (e.g. "title") only make "microformats sense" if they're under the DOM tree of a root class name. The root class names have been chosen not to conflict with known existing uses [1][2]. Regards, etc... David [1] http://microformats.org/wiki/naming-principles#Unique_Root_Class_Names [2] http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard-parsing#root_class_name -- David Janes Founder, BlogMatrix http://www.blogmatrix.com http://blogmatrix.blogmatrix.com From rob at sanchothefat.com Thu Feb 1 07:37:49 2007 From: rob at sanchothefat.com (Rob O'Rourke) Date: Thu Feb 1 07:38:00 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] mime types and microformats In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45C2094D.9040405@sanchothefat.com> Hi there, I have a question regarding mime types and microformat parsing, an area i find thoroughly confusing because of the differences in opinion on the web. I just read an article [1] that goes on about serving XHTML as text/html and why it's bad. It seems fair enough but I see it all over the place even on websites of experts like ppk, tantek's site, wordpress blogs etc... so I do it myself. The article suggests that XHTML doctype or no if it's served as text/html then it's treated as HTML. Secondly the wiki definition states they must be in (x)HTML/XML documents. If (x)HTML documents when served as text/html are treated as HTML how are the microformats still working? Does this mean microformats will work under an HTML 4.01 doctype? I might have the wrong end of the stick if the mime type only relates to browser rendering and compatibility... like I said I'm confused. [1] http://www.hixie.ch/advocacy/xhtml Cheers, Rob From charlvn at charlvn.za.net Thu Feb 1 07:48:34 2007 From: charlvn at charlvn.za.net (Charl van Niekerk) Date: Thu Feb 1 07:48:38 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] mime types and microformats In-Reply-To: <45C2094D.9040405@sanchothefat.com> References: <45C2094D.9040405@sanchothefat.com> Message-ID: On 2/1/07, Rob O'Rourke wrote: > I have a question regarding mime types and microformat parsing, an > area i find thoroughly confusing because of the differences in opinion > on the web. I just read an article [1] that goes on about serving XHTML > as text/html and why it's bad. It seems fair enough but I see it all > over the place even on websites of experts like ppk, tantek's site, > wordpress blogs etc... so I do it myself. The article suggests that > XHTML doctype or no if it's served as text/html then it's treated as > HTML. Secondly the wiki definition states they must be in (x)HTML/XML > documents. If (x)HTML documents when served as text/html are treated as > HTML how are the microformats still working? Does this mean microformats > will work under an HTML 4.01 doctype? > > I might have the wrong end of the stick if the mime type only relates to > browser rendering and compatibility... like I said I'm confused. I use Microformats on two of my websites, both inside of HTML 4.01 Strict, and most parsers seem to read them perfectly. Microformats integrates nicely into both XHTML and HTML; it uses the class attribute which is defined for both so I think you don't need to worry about using Microformats inside of either. Some examples: http://charlvn.virafrikaans.com/contact http://gross.org.za/calendar Cheers, Charl -- Charl van Niekerk http://charlvn.za.net From lists at ben-ward.co.uk Thu Feb 1 07:58:17 2007 From: lists at ben-ward.co.uk (Ben Ward) Date: Thu Feb 1 07:58:29 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] mime types and microformats In-Reply-To: <45C2094D.9040405@sanchothefat.com> References: <45C2094D.9040405@sanchothefat.com> Message-ID: <78287FEA-AAF4-4D83-AC8B-2000451D025A@ben-ward.co.uk> On 1 Feb 2007, at 15:37, Rob O'Rourke wrote: > If (x)HTML documents when served as text/html are treated as HTML > how are the microformats still working? Does this mean microformats > will work under an HTML 4.01 doctype? Microformats are generally parsed absolutely fine in both XHTML and HTML, for one of two reasons: ? Some parsers (such as JavaScript bookmarklets) parse the HTMLDOM with script, after the browser has done its parsing so at that level, it makes no difference whether the document is HTML or XHTML. ? Other parsers (such as X2V) use an XSLT stylesheet to convert from XHTML into vcard or icalendar. These first run pages through a tool called Tidy, which converts HTML to well formed XHTML to allow the XSLT to run. Basically, microformats are easier to parse directly if you use mark- up that validates as XML (the mime type doesn't make a difference in practice), but since open source tools exist that makes switching HTML into XHTML simple, real world parsing is very tolerant. Ben From rob at sanchothefat.com Thu Feb 1 08:18:22 2007 From: rob at sanchothefat.com (Rob O'Rourke) Date: Thu Feb 1 08:18:25 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] mime types and microformats In-Reply-To: <78287FEA-AAF4-4D83-AC8B-2000451D025A@ben-ward.co.uk> References: <45C2094D.9040405@sanchothefat.com> <78287FEA-AAF4-4D83-AC8B-2000451D025A@ben-ward.co.uk> Message-ID: <45C212CE.2090707@sanchothefat.com> Ben Ward wrote: > On 1 Feb 2007, at 15:37, Rob O'Rourke wrote: >> If (x)HTML documents when served as text/html are treated as HTML how >> are the microformats still working? Does this mean microformats will >> work under an HTML 4.01 doctype? > > Microformats are generally parsed absolutely fine in both XHTML and > HTML, for one of two reasons: > > ? Some parsers (such as JavaScript bookmarklets) parse the HTMLDOM > with script, after the browser has done its parsing so at that level, > it makes no difference whether the document is HTML or XHTML. > ? Other parsers (such as X2V) use an XSLT stylesheet to convert from > XHTML into vcard or icalendar. These first run pages through a tool > called Tidy, which converts HTML to well formed XHTML to allow the > XSLT to run. > > Basically, microformats are easier to parse directly if you use > mark-up that validates as XML (the mime type doesn't make a difference > in practice), but since open source tools exist that makes switching > HTML into XHTML simple, real world parsing is very tolerant. > > Ben I see, clever stuff. Thanks for clarifying Ben. From lists at ben-ward.co.uk Thu Feb 1 08:23:25 2007 From: lists at ben-ward.co.uk (Ben Ward) Date: Thu Feb 1 08:23:39 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] hMood/hPresence? In-Reply-To: <000c01c7455c$e379b320$4001a8c0@SETHI001> References: <000c01c7455c$e379b320$4001a8c0@SETHI001> Message-ID: <7BF80AB4-93BB-46B4-ACFE-48BA570FC1BB@ben-ward.co.uk> Hi Sam, On 31 Jan 2007, at 17:26, Sam Sethi wrote: > Just wondering does presence and mood really apply to a > microformat? What I > want is federated presence across applications and devices. > Personally I hope XMPP becomes the interoperable standard for > presence and > then we an build apps on top of this? I've not got a particular interest in a mood/presence microformat personally, but I think it's worth pointing out that you've got two different issues in hand there. I completely agree that having some means of unifying ?presence status? across applications would be fantastic. I also agree that a microformat is not an obvious answer to solve that problem (although it could be done and could work, all the same). The focus of an hMood microformat would be different though, reflecting the fact that right now, people can and do publish their moods and presence in HTML. Separately from IM and all the rest, but published all the same. On the premise that something useful can be done with this information that is already being published, a microformat would just make that information discoverable in a consistant manner. Nothing more. Now as you think ahead, of course if *could* be used by services one source of unified status, but that's not the problem a microformat would be focused on solving. Ben From derrick at pallas.us Thu Feb 1 08:44:59 2007 From: derrick at pallas.us (Derrick Lyndon Pallas) Date: Thu Feb 1 08:45:33 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Should microformat features (like rel-tag) have explicit scope? In-Reply-To: References: <45C15975.6060304@pallas.us> Message-ID: <45C2190B.6030604@pallas.us> Ciaran McNulty wrote: > Can I ask what the confusion is? > > If I have a hcard with a rel-tag indicating 'football' in that hCard, > then the naive interpretation that 'this page has something on it to > do with football' that your parser will take from it is probably > correct. > What about an xFolk link with a tag of ? Should that imply that the containing page is not safe for work? Do the xFolk entries on unalog imply that unalog is about any of those tags? Here's my problem: rel-tag is reusable. It applies to whatever contains it. Well, except under specific circumstances which are documented in the other formats in which it has been reused, then it only applies to a sub-container, which we didn't mark in a generic way. I'm just looking for a generic scoping mark. ~D From andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk Thu Feb 1 02:09:58 2007 From: andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk (Andy Mabbett) Date: Thu Feb 1 09:11:45 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Profiles in-the-wild (was:Microformats, WebApps 1.0 and UI widgets in browsers) In-Reply-To: <8434A459-7C78-42F8-BEF6-98E6F0A5D040@w3.org> References: <8434A459-7C78-42F8-BEF6-98E6F0A5D040@w3.org> Message-ID: In message <8434A459-7C78-42F8-BEF6-98E6F0A5D040@w3.org>, Karl Dubost writes >I think there is a possible win-win here. The Mozilla UI widget could >be activated only when the right URI (profile attribute) is really >here. What proportion of pages currently marked up with microformats use the "correct profile, and do so correctly? I've created to collect examples. -- Andy Mabbett Welcome to the 29-day week! From andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk Thu Feb 1 03:15:25 2007 From: andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk (Andy Mabbett) Date: Thu Feb 1 09:11:46 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Microformats, WebApps 1.0 and UI widgets in browsers In-Reply-To: References: <8434A459-7C78-42F8-BEF6-98E6F0A5D040@w3.org> Message-ID: In message , Kevin Marks writes > >On Jan 31, 2007, at 11:25 PM, Karl Dubost wrote: >> At first, I say ?cool, very cool!?. Then, taking a step back, >>I think what about the documents which have been created for the >>last 15 years before microformats effort existed. These documents >>contain class names which are probably and most certainly very >>similar to some values defined by microformats community. > >Karl, can you document instances of use of 'vcard', 'vevent', 'hfeed,' >'hresume', 'hreview' etc before microformats defined them? > >Very similar isn't an issue; exactly identical is. I shouldn't be in the least surprised if "geo" wasn't already in use somewhere, and probably "adr" Also, given that, after sending vast amounts of money, multinational companies still mange to release models of cars with names which translate into things like "you smell" in certain territories, what efforts have been made to check that, say, "hfeed" doesn't mean, say, "menu" in some language or other? -- Andy Mabbett Welcome to the 29-day week! From andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk Thu Feb 1 08:48:45 2007 From: andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk (Andy Mabbett) Date: Thu Feb 1 09:11:46 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] hMood/hPresence? In-Reply-To: <7BF80AB4-93BB-46B4-ACFE-48BA570FC1BB@ben-ward.co.uk> References: <000c01c7455c$e379b320$4001a8c0@SETHI001> <7BF80AB4-93BB-46B4-ACFE-48BA570FC1BB@ben-ward.co.uk> Message-ID: In message <7BF80AB4-93BB-46B4-ACFE-48BA570FC1BB@ben-ward.co.uk>, Ben Ward writes >I completely agree that having some means of unifying ?presence >status? across applications would be fantastic. I also agree that a >microformat is not an obvious answer to solve that problem (although >it could be done and could work, all the same). That sounds like a job for RSS/ Atom; or a microsummary. -- Andy Mabbett Welcome to the 29-day week! From joe at andrieu.net Thu Feb 1 09:20:57 2007 From: joe at andrieu.net (Joe Andrieu) Date: Thu Feb 1 09:20:53 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Andy Mabbet's moderation Message-ID: <00fd01c74625$5730d1e0$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> Tantek, et Cabal, >From the last blat of messages from Andy, I'm presuming that he is still being moderated? That punishment was to be for only a week. I'd be curious to know why it has lasted so long. And if he is still being moderated, I would kindly ask that you allow him to post without restriction. Regards, -j -- Joe Andrieu joe@andrieu.net +1 (805) 705-8651 From mail at ciaranmcnulty.com Thu Feb 1 09:24:24 2007 From: mail at ciaranmcnulty.com (Ciaran McNulty) Date: Thu Feb 1 09:24:28 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Should microformat features (like rel-tag) have explicit scope? In-Reply-To: <45C2190B.6030604@pallas.us> References: <45C15975.6060304@pallas.us> <45C2190B.6030604@pallas.us> Message-ID: On 2/1/07, Derrick Lyndon Pallas wrote: > What about an xFolk link with a tag of ? > Should that imply that the containing page is not safe for work? Well if an item on a page is tagged NSFW doesn't that mean the page is NSFW? I must confess I'm not 100% familiar with xFolk. > rel-tag is reusable. It applies to whatever contains it. Well, except > under specific circumstances which are documented in the other formats > in which it has been reused, then it only applies to a sub-container, > which we didn't mark in a generic way. > > I'm just looking for a generic scoping mark. ~D My point is that rel-tag doesn't have any scope, and I'm sort-of arguing it doesn't need it. Take the example of a page that contains: * An hAtom entry tagged with 'FOO' * An hCard with the category 'BAR' An hAtom parser will correctly note that the only rel-tag in the hAtom entry is 'FOO' and so that's the category for the entry. An hCard parser will note that the only rel-tag inside the hCard is 'BAR, and so that category applies to the card. However, a generic rel-tag parser doesn't need to know "don't look inside hAtom and hCard", as you seem to be suggesting. Any rel-tags it finds may be applied to the page itself quite fairly, and so a rel-tag parser would say 'this page contains something relevant to FOO and something relevant to BAR. Does that make sense? -Ciaran McNulty From ara.pehlivanian at gmail.com Thu Feb 1 10:22:11 2007 From: ara.pehlivanian at gmail.com (Ara Pehlivanian) Date: Thu Feb 1 10:22:14 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Authenticity of Authoritative hCard (was: Re: Vote on this: rel="me self" to indicate an authoritative hCard) In-Reply-To: References: <003401c73f61$de549050$69fa030a@andrieuhome> <31CE5291-B702-4A6E-A86B-D8F1328C7A76@ben-ward.co.uk> <21e523c20701310637q7d0a5c6fx4790b484469b8b21@mail.gmail.com> <923a87360701310649h3d054d78k45f8c1a6de18602c@mail.gmail.com> <4056BE37-93ED-4236-AE61-5DB444B5972C@ben-ward.co.uk> <923a87360701310750p3808ce6bp138e9ca7dfdeb7e6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <923a87360702011022k498626c2q1ac911a39b2d5ce3@mail.gmail.com> On 1/31/07, Andy Mabbett wrote: > Perhaps we need a "class="pgp-public-key" property for hCard? Intriguing... A. From brian.suda at gmail.com Thu Feb 1 10:30:55 2007 From: brian.suda at gmail.com (Brian Suda) Date: Thu Feb 1 10:30:59 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Authenticity of Authoritative hCard (was: Re: Vote on this: rel="me self" to indicate an authoritative hCard) In-Reply-To: References: <003401c73f61$de549050$69fa030a@andrieuhome> <31CE5291-B702-4A6E-A86B-D8F1328C7A76@ben-ward.co.uk> <21e523c20701310637q7d0a5c6fx4790b484469b8b21@mail.gmail.com> <923a87360701310649h3d054d78k45f8c1a6de18602c@mail.gmail.com> <4056BE37-93ED-4236-AE61-5DB444B5972C@ben-ward.co.uk> <923a87360701310750p3808ce6bp138e9ca7dfdeb7e6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <21e770780702011030k542ce24fgfa5155f3b52f6c33@mail.gmail.com> On 1/31/07, Andy Mabbett wrote: > In message > <923a87360701310750p3808ce6bp138e9ca7dfdeb7e6@mail.gmail.com>, Ara > Pehlivanian writes > > >what if someone registers ben-ward.net and puts up a fake > >card on that site. > > Perhaps we need a "class="pgp-public-key" property for hCard? > > ;-) --- i'm not sure if that wink was ment for 'pgp-public-key' to be a joke, but hCard and vCard do have a 'key' property. This is an example in the wild. http://www.informatik.uni-hamburg.de/SVS/personnel/henrich/index.php Much like the DATA URI it is possible to embed a BASE64 key into HTML. -brian -- brian suda http://suda.co.uk From scott at randomchaos.com Thu Feb 1 10:34:12 2007 From: scott at randomchaos.com (Scott Reynen) Date: Thu Feb 1 10:34:31 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Andy Mabbet's moderation In-Reply-To: <00fd01c74625$5730d1e0$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> References: <00fd01c74625$5730d1e0$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> Message-ID: On Feb 1, 2007, at 11:20 AM, Joe Andrieu wrote: > Tantek, et Cabal, > >> From the last blat of messages from Andy, I'm presuming that he is >> still >> being moderated? I don't know the answer to that question. I would only presume that Andy believes he is still being moderated, but I don't know how he'd know that unless he were still sending inappropriate messages to the list, in which case, wouldn't that be a good indication that moderation is still needed? > That punishment was to be for only a week. Moderation should not be used as punishment, and I don't believe that was the intent here. On Jan 3, 2007, at 6:01 PM, Tantek ?elik wrote: > I am sorry to do this, but your continued inability to listen to the > requests that have been made, and your continued flood of meta- > discussion > emails on the list have left me no other choice in order to > maintain the > quality of discussion on this list. Maintaining the quality of discussion on this list seems a good goal, and moderation seems to be a good means of achieving that goal. As far as timetables, as I recall there was discussion of *banning* Andy for one week. That was instead changed to moderation, which requires more work by admins, but allows Andy to continue posting appropriate messages to this list. There was no suggestion made about the length of this moderation. On Jan 3, 2007, at 6:01 PM, Tantek ?elik wrote: > absent any objections from anyone else on the > list (or IRC), you will shortly be banned from the mailing-list for > a week. On Jan 3, 2007, at 7:42 PM, Tantek ?elik wrote: > Thus I have moderated him instead of banning him. Joe wrote: > And if he is still > being moderated, I would kindly ask that you allow him to post without > restriction. I'm not clear on the perceived damage of long-term moderation. If it allows the good stuff in and keeps the bad stuff out, I see no harm. If it's keeping good stuff out, I would be very interested in seeing some of this good stuff that was kept out, as it would cause me to question moderation itself, regardless of length. Peace, Scott From joe at andrieu.net Thu Feb 1 10:58:36 2007 From: joe at andrieu.net (Joe Andrieu) Date: Thu Feb 1 10:58:32 2007 Subject: Moderation [was RE: [uf-discuss] Andy Mabbet's moderation] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <010801c74632$fb936b00$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> Scott Reynen wrote: > I'm not clear on the perceived damage of long-term > moderation. If it > allows the good stuff in and keeps the bad stuff out, I see > no harm. > If it's keeping good stuff out, I would be very interested in seeing > some of this good stuff that was kept out, as it would cause me to > question moderation itself, regardless of length. The 15 messages that just landed in my inbox are not the best way to have a conversation, especially as most of those messages are now out of date and out of context. Andy clearly sent those during the conversation and they were held for moderation. They are, IMO, good stuff. Moderation is a form of punishment, whether it is seen that way by the cabal or not. It ostracizes the moderated and prevents them from participating in the community like everyone else. In this case, it has made Andy a second-class uF citizen whose posts are censored in an ill-defined, unchecked process run by unnamed moderators. I say unnamed because although we know some of the moderators, unnamed others have apparently joined the effort as a means of spreading the governance beyond the founding cabal. That's progress, but these new volunteers have remained anonymous. Kind of like the secret police, really. Since this censorship judgment was issued by dictatorial fiat at a point when Andy was agitating over governance issues, I found it particularly disingenuous. That it has continued as long as it has only buttresses my concerns about governance. Obviously, the cabal has the power to do this thing. However, I remain unconvinced that this instance is not simply an abuse of that power. I would appreciate it if someone could forward me the "bad" posts that have justified Andy's continued moderation. In the face of the good posts, there needs to be some non-zero level of bad posts to justify continued moderation. Perhaps there is merit to the moderation. If so, I think it is appropriate for evidence to be shared with those in the community who care to review it. Or, if taking Andy off moderation has simply been overlooked, ok. Mistakes happen. In which case he should be allowed to post normally and we should remember as a community that we don't have the wherewithal to manage fine-tuned corrective procedures. -j -- Joe Andrieu joe@andrieu.net +1 (805) 705-8651 From michael.mccracken at gmail.com Thu Feb 1 11:17:19 2007 From: michael.mccracken at gmail.com (Michael McCracken) Date: Thu Feb 1 11:17:23 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] [hCite] call for examples: language In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 1/31/07, Andy Mabbett wrote: > In message > , Michael > McCracken writes > > >- We only have two examples of pages marking up the language on the > >web - W3C and Amazon.com. > > Might that be because most if not all of the examples are from > English-language websites, and that English-speakers are less likely to > be aware of language of an issue, or to be working on second languages? > Absolutely - I'm asking for help to correct this bias. If anyone can contribute examples from the web of documents in one language citing another language, that would help provide evidence for a language field in hCite. If there are no such examples, we could just say that the citations are assumed to be in the same language, and remove the language field (potentially revisiting it for later revisions of the microformat). -mike -- Michael McCracken UCSD CSE PhD Candidate research: http://www.cse.ucsd.edu/~mmccrack/ misc: http://michael-mccracken.net/wp/ From drernie at opendarwin.org Thu Feb 1 11:38:36 2007 From: drernie at opendarwin.org (Dr. Ernie Prabhakar) Date: Thu Feb 1 11:38:39 2007 Subject: Moderation [was RE: [uf-discuss] Andy Mabbet's moderation] In-Reply-To: <010801c74632$fb936b00$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> References: <010801c74632$fb936b00$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> Message-ID: <747E3FB8-523D-4439-AC9D-55B80505E16F@opendarwin.org> Hi Joe, On Feb 1, 2007, at 10:58 AM, Joe Andrieu wrote: > Or, if taking Andy off moderation has simply been overlooked, ok. > Mistakes happen. In which case he should be allowed to post > normally and > we should remember as a community that we don't have the > wherewithal to > manage fine-tuned corrective procedures. I agree with the concerns about latency, and would welcome feedback from Tantek et al about the status of Andy's "probation" (or whatever you want to call it). Overall, I think the moderators have done a decent job of keeping him in the loop, but (like everything else in this world), it hasn't been perfect, so it would be good to know whether it is still considered necessary. -- Ernie P. From bewest at gmail.com Thu Feb 1 11:38:46 2007 From: bewest at gmail.com (Benjamin West) Date: Thu Feb 1 11:38:54 2007 Subject: Moderation [was RE: [uf-discuss] Andy Mabbet's moderation] In-Reply-To: <010801c74632$fb936b00$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> References: <010801c74632$fb936b00$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> Message-ID: <8ad71be30702011138i3324af11m76ae8fdf563f94ba@mail.gmail.com> > Moderation is a form of punishment, whether it is seen that way by the > cabal or not. It ostracizes the moderated and prevents them from > participating in the community like everyone else. In this case, it has > made Andy a second-class uF citizen whose posts are censored in an > ill-defined, unchecked process run by unnamed moderators. I say unnamed > because although we know some of the moderators, unnamed others have > apparently joined the effort as a means of spreading the governance > beyond the founding cabal. That's progress, but these new volunteers > have remained anonymous. Kind of like the secret police, really. Joe, I'm having trouble gauging how serious you are, because this interpretation of events is so different from how I, and I believe others, percieve the same events. The -admin list discussed what to do and the proposed actions were disclosed to the public. The fact that he was moderated instead of banned was due to community input. All actions taken were clearly taken by Tantek, who has always been an influential leader in this community. What part of this is secret? The community did have a say in what happened, and Tantek executed exactly that plan. > Since this censorship judgment was issued by dictatorial fiat at a point > when Andy was agitating over governance issues, I found it particularly > disingenuous. Again, this is an interesting interpretation. The actions were discussed on the -admin list by a worldwide group of volunteers. The results were disclosed on the -discuss list. The community gave feedback on the results. This didn't happen because Andy disagrees, it happened because of his behaviour while disagreeing. That it has continued as long as it has only buttresses my > concerns about governance. Obviously, the cabal has the power to do > this thing. However, I remain unconvinced that this instance is not > simply an abuse of that power. > > I would appreciate it if someone could forward me the "bad" posts that > have justified Andy's continued moderation. In the face of the good > posts, there needs to be some non-zero level of bad posts to justify > continued moderation. Perhaps there is merit to the moderation. If so, > I think it is appropriate for evidence to be shared with those in the > community who care to review it. > > Or, if taking Andy off moderation has simply been overlooked, ok. > Mistakes happen. In which case he should be allowed to post normally and > we should remember as a community that we don't have the wherewithal to > manage fine-tuned corrective procedures. > Again, Andy has been extremely helpful during his moderation, and the posts that cause negative influences in the community, personal attacks, and list membership to drop have ceased entirely. There was a limit set on the ban, but no such limit was proposed for the moderation. All evidence suggests that moderation is working. Thanks, Ben PS. There hasn't been many formal announcements regarding "governance issues" for several reasons. One reason is that the group is fairly conservative about making changes and being an "official" voice. Another reason is that we are simply more interested in doing actual work and making progress than dealing with meta-discussions about governance. While I expect this is an area we might improve in, if you are interested in finding the list of admins, you can deduce this list by looking at the admins in the IRC channel. From bewest at gmail.com Thu Feb 1 11:40:28 2007 From: bewest at gmail.com (Benjamin West) Date: Thu Feb 1 11:40:53 2007 Subject: Fwd: [uf-discuss] Species microformat process In-Reply-To: <8ad71be30701310928w44a43e3aka67ac922bfec282b@mail.gmail.com> References: <8ad71be30701300934t2ee67302j787b289ac595ac43@mail.gmail.com> <8ad71be30701310928w44a43e3aka67ac922bfec282b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8ad71be30702011140l207e62f1ld0a812c1322ca727@mail.gmail.com> I accidently sent this to just Andy, when I meant to send it to the list. Oops. Anyway, I think the input others have had on this thread is very good, and I look forward to seeing the results. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Benjamin West Date: Jan 31, 2007 9:28 AM Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Species microformat process To: Andy Mabbett > >To be honest, the > >use case for the species microformat is a little bit weak. > > In what way do you think it could be weak? What information do you think > is lacking? It's not clear what the problem is. The statements refer to a future filled with software agents that know "where to search." Most of the examples you collected exhibit a hyperlinking behaviour to link the name being referenced to a more substantial article on the subject. It's not clear why a new format is required because it appears that the problem can be solved with either simple hyperlinking or with some clever application of rel-tag. > >It could > >be that if there is a lack of demand, it is due to the weak use case > >and the gap between the research and the proposal. > > In what way do you feel there is a gap between the research and the > proposal? How do you fee that the two could be more closely linked? The proposed format doesn't bear any resemblence to publishing behaviour in terms of the content and properties being published. The markup also does not resemble current publishing practices. > Why would you want to differentiate between two types of publishing? How > would you decide where to draw the line? "Right tool for the right job." Publishing behaviour would draw the line. Different types of publishing may or may not need different techniques for doing so. Ben West From ckstjohn at gmail.com Thu Feb 1 12:37:47 2007 From: ckstjohn at gmail.com (Christopher St John) Date: Thu Feb 1 12:37:55 2007 Subject: Moderation [was RE: [uf-discuss] Andy Mabbet's moderation] In-Reply-To: <8ad71be30702011138i3324af11m76ae8fdf563f94ba@mail.gmail.com> References: <010801c74632$fb936b00$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> <8ad71be30702011138i3324af11m76ae8fdf563f94ba@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8ba906450702011237y7626eff8y206d4620dfb8aa17@mail.gmail.com> > if > you are interested in finding the list of admins, you can deduce this > list by looking at the admins in the IRC channel. > Thanks a lot. I was drinking coffee when I read that, and I ended up spurting some out my nose. I can tell you one thing, hot coffee is definitely not meant to be taken nasally. Just when I thought this thread as entirely humorless :-) -cks -- Christopher St. John http://artofsystems.blogspot.com From bewest at gmail.com Thu Feb 1 12:51:29 2007 From: bewest at gmail.com (Benjamin West) Date: Thu Feb 1 12:51:32 2007 Subject: Moderation [was RE: [uf-discuss] Andy Mabbet's moderation] In-Reply-To: <8ba906450702011237y7626eff8y206d4620dfb8aa17@mail.gmail.com> References: <010801c74632$fb936b00$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> <8ad71be30702011138i3324af11m76ae8fdf563f94ba@mail.gmail.com> <8ba906450702011237y7626eff8y206d4620dfb8aa17@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8ad71be30702011251g2e5db2adl57b083ba0f2f3527@mail.gmail.com> Hehehe. Sorry. I was merely suggesting that method because it is accurate and public, if a bit tedious. We're working to correct that at . Thanks, Ben (BTW, there are coffee recipes intended to be consumed via non-oral means.) On 2/1/07, Christopher St John wrote: > > if > > you are interested in finding the list of admins, you can deduce this > > list by looking at the admins in the IRC channel. > > > > Thanks a lot. I was drinking coffee when I read that, and I ended up > spurting some out my nose. I can tell you one thing, hot coffee is > definitely not meant to be taken nasally. Just when I thought this > thread as entirely humorless :-) > > -cks > > > -- > Christopher St. John > http://artofsystems.blogspot.com > _______________________________________________ > microformats-discuss mailing list > microformats-discuss@microformats.org > http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss > From joe at andrieu.net Thu Feb 1 12:53:09 2007 From: joe at andrieu.net (Joe Andrieu) Date: Thu Feb 1 12:53:07 2007 Subject: Moderation [was RE: [uf-discuss] Andy Mabbet's moderation] In-Reply-To: <8ad71be30702011138i3324af11m76ae8fdf563f94ba@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <011f01c74642$fd05cc70$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> Benjamin West wrote: > > Moderation is a form of punishment, whether it is seen that > way by the > > cabal or not. It ostracizes the moderated and prevents them from > > participating in the community like everyone else. In this case, it > > has made Andy a second-class uF citizen whose posts are > censored in an > > ill-defined, unchecked process run by unnamed moderators. I say > > unnamed because although we know some of the moderators, unnamed > > others have apparently joined the effort as a means of > spreading the > > governance beyond the founding cabal. That's progress, but > these new > > volunteers have remained anonymous. Kind of like the > secret police, > > really. > > Joe, I'm having trouble gauging how serious you are, because > this interpretation of events is so different from how I, and > I believe others, percieve the same events. The -admin list > discussed what to do and the proposed actions were disclosed > to the public. The fact that he was moderated instead of > banned was due to community input. All actions taken were > clearly taken by Tantek, who has always been an influential > leader in this community. What part of this is secret? The > community did have a say in what happened, and Tantek > executed exactly that plan. Respectfully, the difference in perspective is from what is done in secret and what is done publicly. I wouldn't quite agree that "proposed actions" were disclosed to the public. Rather, one proposed action was disclosed as imminent with a brief window of appeal. When I, and others, disagreed with that action, a different action--which had not been disclosed or discussed in public--was summarily imposed. What is secret is the conversation on the -admin list. I didn't even know it existed. And to say that the community had a say in Tantek's action is about as valid as saying the American public had a say in George Bush's recent troop increase. If instead, a transcript of the discussion leading to the action had been shared with the public, it would've gone a long way to assuaging my frustrations at the lack of openness in the uF governance process. > > Since this censorship judgment was issued by dictatorial fiat at a > > point when Andy was agitating over governance issues, I found it > > particularly disingenuous. > > Again, this is an interesting interpretation. The actions > were discussed on the -admin list by a worldwide group of > volunteers. The results were disclosed on the -discuss list. > The community gave feedback on the results. This didn't > happen because Andy disagrees, it happened because of his > behaviour while disagreeing. Yes, the "worldwide group of volunteers," the ever expanding cabal of secret police. ;) Seriously, Ben, I would appreciate disclosure of who these volunteers are and what was said for and against Andy in making the decision. I do believe that you are all acting in what you feel is in the best interest of the group. However, that's not sufficient. Tyrants and dictators always feel they are acting in the group's best interest and usually have very compelling justifications for their actions. What's necessary is transparency about who is making the decisions and why. I may agree with those decisions, but when they are hidden, it only rouses suspicions. If I could see how the leaders of this group actually make decisions, I could come to some informed conclusions about how I can best contribute and even if contributing to the effort is still in my interest. So far, I'm hopeful that these are simply growing pains from a community that is young and not so experienced in scaling beyond the inner clique. > That it has continued as long as it has only buttresses my > > concerns about governance. Obviously, the cabal has the > power to do > > this thing. However, I remain unconvinced that this > instance is not > > simply an abuse of that power. > > > > I would appreciate it if someone could forward me the "bad" > posts that > > have justified Andy's continued moderation. In the face of the good > > posts, there needs to be some non-zero level of bad posts > to justify > > continued moderation. Perhaps there is merit to the > moderation. If > > so, I think it is appropriate for evidence to be shared > with those in > > the community who care to review it. > > > > Or, if taking Andy off moderation has simply been overlooked, ok. > > Mistakes happen. In which case he should be allowed to post > normally > > and we should remember as a community that we don't have the > > wherewithal to manage fine-tuned corrective procedures. > > > > Again, Andy has been extremely helpful during his moderation, > and the posts that cause negative influences in the > community, personal attacks, and list membership to drop have > ceased entirely. There was a limit set on the ban, but no > such limit was proposed for the moderation. All evidence > suggests that moderation is working. So, you are happy that the moderation was imposed summarily and without deadline. That's harsh. The clear implication from the conversation was that the moderation would be for one week, and I believe Tantek said as much on IRC at the time[1]. However, if we have devolved into debating minor technicalities, we are missing the point. If it worked, great. Then we should lift the probation. Andy's already forwarded one email to me that didn't seem worth moderating, and it is clear the bundle of recent posts would have been much more useful if they had also been timely. > PS. There hasn't been many formal announcements regarding > "governance issues" for several reasons. One reason is that > the group is fairly conservative about making changes and > being an "official" voice. Another reason is that we are > simply more interested in doing actual work and making > progress than dealing with meta-discussions about governance. > While I expect this is an area we might improve in, if you > are interested in finding the list of admins, you can deduce > this list by looking at the admins in the IRC channel. I understand the experiential and cultural biases. However, the youth of the organization and the desire for current leadership to avoid systematizing the mechanisms of governance is not sufficient basis for maintaining the status quo. Suggesting that who's who on the IRC channel is sufficient disclosure misses the bigger picture that uF is bigger than the cabal that hangs out on IRC and deserves a commons and processes that can begin to address these issues more openly. Respectfully, -j [1] http://rbach.priv.at/Microformats-IRC/2007-01-04#T011730 -- Joe Andrieu joe@andrieu.net +1 (805) 705-8651 From andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk Thu Feb 1 10:53:15 2007 From: andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk (Andy Mabbett) Date: Thu Feb 1 13:20:25 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Authenticity of Authoritative hCard (was: Re: Vote on this: rel="me self" to indicate an authoritative hCard) In-Reply-To: <21e770780702011030k542ce24fgfa5155f3b52f6c33@mail.gmail.com> References: <003401c73f61$de549050$69fa030a@andrieuhome> <31CE5291-B702-4A6E-A86B-D8F1328C7A76@ben-ward.co.uk> <21e523c20701310637q7d0a5c6fx4790b484469b8b21@mail.gmail.com> <923a87360701310649h3d054d78k45f8c1a6de18602c@mail.gmail.com> <4056BE37-93ED-4236-AE61-5DB444B5972C@ben-ward.co.uk> <923a87360701310750p3808ce6bp138e9ca7dfdeb7e6@mail.gmail.com> <21e770780702011030k542ce24fgfa5155f3b52f6c33@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: In message <21e770780702011030k542ce24fgfa5155f3b52f6c33@mail.gmail.com>, Brian Suda writes >This is an example in the wild. >http://www.informatik.uni-hamburg.de/SVS/personnel/henrich/index.php I wonder what an aural browser/ screen reader would make of that... -- Andy Mabbett Welcome to the 29-day week! From andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk Thu Feb 1 12:26:26 2007 From: andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk (Andy Mabbett) Date: Thu Feb 1 13:20:25 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] [hCite] call for examples: language In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: In message , Michael McCracken writes >On 1/31/07, Andy Mabbett wrote: >> In message >> , Michael >> McCracken writes >> >> >- We only have two examples of pages marking up the language on the >> >web - W3C and Amazon.com. >> >> Might that be because most if not all of the examples are from >> English-language websites, and that English-speakers are less likely to >> be aware of language of an issue, or to be working on second languages? >> > >Absolutely - I'm asking for help to correct this bias. Doh! I have some myself, on: -- Andy Mabbett Welcome to the 29-day week! From michael.mccracken at gmail.com Thu Feb 1 15:07:42 2007 From: michael.mccracken at gmail.com (Michael McCracken) Date: Thu Feb 1 15:07:46 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] [hCite] call for examples: language In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 2/1/07, Andy Mabbett wrote: > In message > , Michael > McCracken writes > > >On 1/31/07, Andy Mabbett wrote: > >> In message > >> , Michael > >> McCracken writes > >> > >> >- We only have two examples of pages marking up the language on the > >> >web - W3C and Amazon.com. > >> > >> Might that be because most if not all of the examples are from > >> English-language websites, and that English-speakers are less likely to > >> be aware of language of an issue, or to be working on second languages? > >> > > > >Absolutely - I'm asking for help to correct this bias. > > Doh! I have some myself, on: > > Nice, those are good examples - they do mark up the language of the citation itself, but don't mention the language of the cited object (presumably because it's easy to deduce) - was that intentional or just following established practice? Also, could you add those examples to the citation-examples & citation-examples-markup wiki pages (if they're not already there)? In my experience, established practice is that the language is not explicitly stated, and if it is, the case of a citation printing a title in one language that is referring to an item in a different language (eg, printing the title of a german book in english) is rare. So if the evidence confirms my suspicion that it's really rare to need to mark up the language of (for example) the book separately from the language of the words in the book's title, then can we just say that the language is inferred from the @lang property of the hcite element? (And hence, drop the 'language' field from the hCite straw format?) Thanks, -mike -- Michael McCracken UCSD CSE PhD Candidate research: http://www.cse.ucsd.edu/~mmccrack/ misc: http://michael-mccracken.net/wp/ From derrick at pallas.us Thu Feb 1 18:14:43 2007 From: derrick at pallas.us (Derrick Lyndon Pallas) Date: Thu Feb 1 18:15:06 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Should microformat features (like rel-tag) have explicit scope? In-Reply-To: References: <45C15975.6060304@pallas.us> <45C2190B.6030604@pallas.us> Message-ID: <45C29E93.3050506@pallas.us> > My point is that rel-tag doesn't have any scope, and I'm sort-of > arguing it doesn't need it. Except it does need it. Say you put your del.icio.us (or otherwise) feed on your page and want to include it and the associated tags as xFolk entries. How can a generic rel-tag parser know that the xFolk entires don't apply to the current page without knowing about xFolk. That's the scoping problem. > However, a generic rel-tag parser doesn't need to know "don't look > inside hAtom and hCard", as you seem to be suggesting. Any rel-tags > it finds may be applied to the page itself quite fairly, and so a > rel-tag parser would say 'this page contains something relevant to FOO > and something relevant to BAR. False. The example above demonstrates that there is a use-case for having an explicit scope. In fact, the issue was brought up on the rel-tag-issues page 20060404 and has never been resolved. The problem is not that they "may be applied to the page" it's that they "are applied to the page" and there are reasons that is inappropriate, i.e. we need to indicate scope. My solution (to indicate scope with a generic rel-tag counterpart and then allow specific parsers to override the scoping rule if they understand the containing element) is both general and powerful. Take the example of a dead relative: there is no way to put a family tree with relatives you need to tag as "deceased" on your own page without a document level parser concluding that you are dead. ~D From fberriman at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 02:07:27 2007 From: fberriman at gmail.com (Frances Berriman) Date: Fri Feb 2 02:07:30 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] hMood/hPresence? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 31/01/07, Andy Mabbett wrote: > In message > , Frances > Berriman writes > > >As for an activity (if this is what you may be suggesting by > >presense), the same would apply (is currently >href="http://www.wikipedia.com/skydiving" rel="tag">sky diving and > > about > >it). > > How would you differentiate between something written *about* > sky-diving, and one written *while*, er, sky-diving? Perhaps using another rel value, similar to #? I'm just not sure what the best descriptive keyword would be! -- Frances Berriman http://fberriman.com From timber at lava.net Fri Feb 2 04:04:38 2007 From: timber at lava.net (Colin Barrett) Date: Fri Feb 2 04:04:41 2007 Subject: Moderation [was RE: [uf-discuss] Andy Mabbet's moderation] In-Reply-To: <011f01c74642$fd05cc70$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> References: <011f01c74642$fd05cc70$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> Message-ID: <302C91FD-0589-4A05-A820-3E93D2F566AF@lava.net> On Feb 1, 2007, at 12:53 PM, Joe Andrieu wrote: > And to say that the community had a say in Tantek's > action is about as valid as saying the American public had a say in > George Bush's recent troop increase. You are treading dangerously close to invoking Godwin's Law[1] here, and a number of other places in your recent messages. I'd ask that you refrain from this sort of thing. It's certainly possible to address these issues without comparisons like that, and it would certainly be welcome, I think, by all involved. Again, in general, I've found your tone to be disrespectful to the integrity of all members of this list, by implying that we would allow a tyrannical "government" to rule over the unknowing masses, and particularly to the outstanding administrators of this list, who have been *extremely* measured in their response to many members of this list, something for which I applaud them -- having been on the other side of the coin it's extremely easy to just remove someone from the equation, but they have bent over backwards (IMO) to accommodate Andy, calling them dictators totally unnecessary just plain incorrect on a variety of levels. Is there room for improvement? Always. Is this the place to talk about it? Probably. Is comparing them to a secret police or to an unpopular sitting American president necessary or helpful to the debate? Probably not. -Colin [1] http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/G/Godwins-Law.html From davidjanes at blogmatrix.com Fri Feb 2 04:10:57 2007 From: davidjanes at blogmatrix.com (David Janes) Date: Fri Feb 2 04:11:01 2007 Subject: Moderation [was RE: [uf-discuss] Andy Mabbet's moderation] In-Reply-To: <302C91FD-0589-4A05-A820-3E93D2F566AF@lava.net> References: <011f01c74642$fd05cc70$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> <302C91FD-0589-4A05-A820-3E93D2F566AF@lava.net> Message-ID: <21e523c20702020410w3f3dfb94iceeff951a4895549@mail.gmail.com> On 2/2/07, Colin Barrett wrote: > On Feb 1, 2007, at 12:53 PM, Joe Andrieu wrote: > > > And to say that the community had a say in Tantek's > > action is about as valid as saying the American public had a say in > > George Bush's recent troop increase. > > You are treading dangerously close to invoking Godwin's Law[1] here, > and a number of other places in your recent messages. > > I'd ask that you refrain from this sort of thing. It's certainly > possible to address these issues without comparisons like that, and it > would certainly be welcome, I think, by all involved. > > Again, in general, I've found your tone to be disrespectful to the > integrity of all members of this list, by implying that we would allow > a tyrannical "government" to rule over the unknowing masses, and > particularly to the outstanding administrators of this list, who have > been *extremely* measured in their response to many members of this > list, something for which I applaud them -- having been on the other > side of the coin it's extremely easy to just remove someone from the > equation, but they have bent over backwards (IMO) to accommodate Andy, > calling them dictators totally unnecessary just plain incorrect on a > variety of levels. > > Is there room for improvement? Always. Is this the place to talk about > it? Probably. Is comparing them to a secret police or to an unpopular > sitting American president necessary or helpful to the debate? > Probably not. Hear hear. Keep your politics on your blog. Regards, etc... -- David Janes Founder, BlogMatrix http://www.blogmatrix.com http://blogmatrix.blogmatrix.com From timber at lava.net Fri Feb 2 04:20:00 2007 From: timber at lava.net (Colin Barrett) Date: Fri Feb 2 04:20:03 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Species microformat process In-Reply-To: References: <8ad71be30701300934t2ee67302j787b289ac595ac43@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <66A15772-13F4-46EB-BD6E-80776D4B18A1@lava.net> On Feb 1, 2007, at 7:31 AM, Charles Roper wrote: > What does the community feel should be the focus for species at > present? Now that I know that the analysis of existing practice is > about the existing *content* rather than existing *markup*, That's not entirely true. Existing markup plays a large role in what is published. Obviously it's not all going to be standardized, but if there are some common class names and general structure that is used, that may be taken into consideration, especially a case where, unlike hcard and hcalendar, there isn't already a commonly used format with a spec already written out. In a case like that, existing markup becomes very important. The main idea right now would be to be discussing things on the brainstorming page. Read over Andy's strawman, debate it. If need be, draw up another draft, and another, until you can reach some kind of consensus amongst the interested parties. It may be relevant to "check in" with this list from time to time, but by and large people who are interested should be going to and talking on, the relevant wiki pages. If I've gotten any of the above paragraph wrong, list, feel free to jump in. > I'm less > inclined to say the existing proposal is *over*complex. Sure, it looks > complex to the untrained eye because the taxonomic hierarchy *is* > complex, but then so is the full hCard spec. My own view is that > because species is an extraction of the existing Linnaen taxonomic > hierarchy ... > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linnaen_taxonomy > > ... its complexity is justified, surely? > > I'm still able to be persuaded either way on this one, though, should > a compelling argument arise. You might want to consider writing up a document that explains some of the choices you made to someone with only passing (high school level) knowledge of taxonomy. Are there other taxonomical systems? Why did you chose this one? How standard is it? Are people using any informal standards that might be more widespread? If they are, why did you reject them? I know some of those questions are answered on the Wikipedia, and I'm not even sure that this list is the right place to post those answers to be posted, as well. It might be helpful to add something like that to the microformats process itself -- I think it could be a helpful tool for specification writers to make them think about the document they're writing a little harder about exactly what they're doing. -Colin From danny.ayers at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 05:12:52 2007 From: danny.ayers at gmail.com (Danny Ayers) Date: Fri Feb 2 05:12:59 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] XMDP Profile for hCalendar Message-ID: <1f2ed5cd0702020512j4a2206abt52a2d635bb3de11e@mail.gmail.com> I needed a profile URI for hCalendar for use with GRDDL, but there wasn't even a profile. There was a list of terms [1] on the microformats wiki, so using DanC's hCard profile [2] as a template I've made a first draft [3]. I've no idea how complete or accurate the list of terms is, though editorial tweaking is clearly needed and I haven't (yet) included links to the corresponding sections of RFC 2445. I'd be very grateful if someone could place this at a more trustworthy location, in lieu of a more complete profile. According to the wiki [4]: [[ it is ACCEPTED that each microformat should have a profile URI ]] However the issue of what domain to use remains open. Given that the only concrete proposal that has appeared in relation to this (in nearly a year) is to use W3C space, I suggest the microformats community accept this proposal and make a request to the W3C for them to mint a URI for the hCalendar profile, following W3C namespace policy. Cheers, Danny. [1] http://microformats.org/wiki/hcalendar-profile [2] http://www.w3.org/2006/03/hcard [3] http://dannyayers.com/microformats/hcalendar-profile [4] http://microformats.org/wiki/profile-uris -- http://dannyayers.com From fberriman at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 05:22:25 2007 From: fberriman at gmail.com (Frances Berriman) Date: Fri Feb 2 05:22:30 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] "Hello World" or "How do I get started with the process?" In-Reply-To: <45BB97EF.5000304@pallas.us> References: <45BB97EF.5000304@pallas.us> Message-ID: On 27/01/07, Derrick Lyndon Pallas wrote: > For anyone that hasn't met me: I'm a software engineer at a search > company. (However, nothing I say on this list is on behalf of or > reflects the views of my company.) For anyone that has met me: yes, I > finally signed up. (I'll no longer need to read over Ben's shoulder.) Hi Derrik! Welcome to the discuss list. > I've been consuming microformats and have some ideas for an additional > format. I've done some research to that end but am not sure if just > putting up a page on the wiki is the right first step. (Are there actual > templates for the pages described in the process document? Or should I > just mimic similarly named pages?) > We have defined a process for suggesting, researching and defining microformats and we encourage those persons interested to read that and try and follow it [1]. A first good port of call though is to chuck a message up on the -discuss list and let the community know what you have in mind and what you want to achieve. You may find others are having the same problems, or alternatively that they've already come up with a way to do what they need to do with existing microformats. [1]http://microformats.org/wiki/process -- Frances Berriman http://fberriman.com From reachme at charlesroper.co.uk Fri Feb 2 05:33:03 2007 From: reachme at charlesroper.co.uk (Charles Roper) Date: Fri Feb 2 05:33:08 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Species microformat process In-Reply-To: <66A15772-13F4-46EB-BD6E-80776D4B18A1@lava.net> References: <8ad71be30701300934t2ee67302j787b289ac595ac43@mail.gmail.com> <66A15772-13F4-46EB-BD6E-80776D4B18A1@lava.net> Message-ID: On 02/02/07, Colin Barrett wrote: > > On Feb 1, 2007, at 7:31 AM, Charles Roper wrote: > > What does the community feel should be the focus for species at > > present? Now that I know that the analysis of existing practice is > > about the existing *content* rather than existing *markup*, > > That's not entirely true. Existing markup plays a large role in what > is published. Obviously it's not all going to be standardized, but if > there are some common class names and general structure that is used, > that may be taken into consideration, especially a case where, unlike > hcard and hcalendar, there isn't already a commonly used format with a > spec already written out. In a case like that, existing markup becomes > very important. Good point. I didn't mean imply that existing markup practice held no value whatsoever. I appreciate that using existing markup practice is a sensible course of action where appropriate. > The main idea right now would be to be discussing things on the > brainstorming page. Read over Andy's strawman, debate it. If need be, > draw up another draft, and another, until you can reach some kind of > consensus amongst the interested parties. It may be relevant to "check > in" with this list from time to time, but by and large people who are > interested should be going to and talking on, the relevant wiki pages. Understood. > You might want to consider writing up a document that explains some of > the choices you made to someone with only passing (high school level) > knowledge of taxonomy. Are there other taxonomical systems? Why did > you chose this one? How standard is it? Are people using any informal > standards that might be more widespread? If they are, why did you > reject them? All good suggestions, thank you. I agree that the answers should go on the wiki. > It might be helpful to add something like that to the microformats > process itself -- I think it could be a helpful tool for specification > writers to make them think about the document they're writing a little > harder about exactly what they're doing. I think you're right. Cheers, Charles -- Charles Roper www.sxbrc.org.uk From laurentwalter.goix at telecomitalia.it Fri Feb 2 05:35:58 2007 From: laurentwalter.goix at telecomitalia.it (Goix Laurent Walter) Date: Fri Feb 2 05:36:06 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] hMood/hPresence? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Andy, Ben, Agreed that Presence interop issue can lead to endless metaphysical discussions and is out of scope here. As both of you pointed out, the proposal is simply for better formalizing self-expression in HTML content, in particular regarding moods and activities. This is already useful in the blogging area for 'presence discovery' out of such info. I'm personally further interested in linking this with some presence system (no matter how), but I understand it may not be shared by all. Probably defining some concepts such as "mood" or "activity" would be fair enough for some hPresence formalism. walter -----Original Message----- From: microformats-discuss-bounces@microformats.org [mailto:microformats-discuss-bounces@microformats.org] On Behalf Of Andy Mabbett Sent: mercoled? 31 gennaio 2007 18.02 To: Microformats Discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] hMood/hPresence? In message , Frances Berriman writes >As for an activity (if this is what you may be suggesting by >presense), the same would apply (is currently href="http://www.wikipedia.com/skydiving" rel="tag">sky diving and > about >it). How would you differentiate between something written *about* sky-diving, and one written *while*, er, sky-diving? -- Andy Mabbett * Say "NO!" to compulsory ID Cards: * Free Our Data: * Are you using Microformats, yet: ? _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss -------------------------------------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the persons above and may contain confidential information. If you have received the message in error, be informed that any use of the content hereof is prohibited. Please return it immediately to the sender and delete the message. Should you have any questions, please contact us by replying to webmaster@telecomitalia.it. Thank you www.telecomitalia.it -------------------------------------------------------------------- From brian.suda at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 05:42:50 2007 From: brian.suda at gmail.com (Brian Suda) Date: Fri Feb 2 05:42:54 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] [hCite] call for examples: language In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <21e770780702020542nc4a3b25t9ee7e725b083cfca@mail.gmail.com> On 2/1/07, Michael McCracken wrote: > So if the evidence confirms my suspicion that it's really rare to need > to mark up the language of (for example) the book separately from the > language of the words in the book's title, then can we just say that > the language is inferred from the @lang property of the hcite element? > (And hence, drop the 'language' field from the hCite straw format?) --- i would agree, that removing the explicit "language" field from the straw format is a good idea. Maybe make a note that this IS a value, but is extracted from the @lang attribute. So it is still present, but in a different way. The whole hCite is still in development. So i think it is best to widdle this down to ONLY the very basic fields needed. Then mark-up real world examples. Then we can itterate and evolve from there. An explicite language field (IMHO) doesn't make the first-cut since we have another (already built in way) to encode this sort of data. Feel free to ammend the wiki as needed. -brian -- brian suda http://suda.co.uk From mail at ciaranmcnulty.com Fri Feb 2 06:07:57 2007 From: mail at ciaranmcnulty.com (Ciaran McNulty) Date: Fri Feb 2 06:08:02 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Should microformat features (like rel-tag) have explicit scope? In-Reply-To: <45C29E93.3050506@pallas.us> References: <45C15975.6060304@pallas.us> <45C2190B.6030604@pallas.us> <45C29E93.3050506@pallas.us> Message-ID: On 2/2/07, Derrick Lyndon Pallas wrote: > Except it does need it. Say you put your del.icio.us (or otherwise) feed > on your page and want to include it and the associated tags as xFolk > entries. How can a generic rel-tag parser know that the xFolk entires > don't apply to the current page without knowing about xFolk. That's the > scoping problem. The tag applying to the page just means that there's something on the page relevant to that tag. And there is - the del.icio.us feed! > The problem is > not that they "may be applied to the page" it's that they "are applied > to the page" I meant 'may' as in 'yes, the parser can go ahead and apply them' - my ambiguity sorry. > and there are reasons that is inappropriate, Can you expand on the reasons? Basically, if a page has a blog entry about Cats and an hCard in the category 'Dogs' on it, why can't that page validly be tagged with 'cats' and 'dogs'? > My solution (to indicate scope with a generic rel-tag > counterpart and then allow specific parsers to override the scoping rule > if they understand the containing element) is both general and powerful. I haven't looked at the different scoping proposals and certainly I'm not saying yours is bad, I'm questioning the need to complicate what is after all an incredibly simple format. > Take the example of a dead relative: there is no way to put a family > tree with relatives you need to tag as "deceased" on your own page > without a document level parser concluding that you are dead. That doesn't make any sense to me. All a rel-tag parser would take from it would be that the page had something on it about someone who's 'dead', surely. I don't know where it starts making inferences about me. -Ciaran From brian.suda at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 06:09:11 2007 From: brian.suda at gmail.com (Brian Suda) Date: Fri Feb 2 06:09:14 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Should microformat features (like rel-tag) have explicit scope? In-Reply-To: <45C29E93.3050506@pallas.us> References: <45C15975.6060304@pallas.us> <45C2190B.6030604@pallas.us> <45C29E93.3050506@pallas.us> Message-ID: <21e770780702020609q319ecc60h96ec84640f656f75@mail.gmail.com> On 2/2/07, Derrick Lyndon Pallas wrote: > Take the example of a dead relative: there is no way to put a family > tree with relatives you need to tag as "deceased" on your own page > without a document level parser concluding that you are dead. --- that is not true, you are not confusing that YOU ARE DEAD, you are only saying that the page has information about 'dead'. Rel-tag when applied to the whole page simply says that there is some information on this page related to 'X'. Nothing more... when you scope it to a specific microformat it gains further meaning about ONLY that object. In your family tree example, a rel-tag crawler would find a rel-tag of dead on the page and index it under the tagspace of 'dead'. This is expected, perfectly valid, and correct behavior. Now, when you look to a specific hCard searcher/spider, it will NOT apply rel-tag of 'dead' to all the hCards on the page, ONLY to the ones where it has been scoped (this is done my adding the rel-tag inside the class="vcard") it will not mix-up things and assume you are dead. Does that make sense? -brian -- brian suda http://suda.co.uk From derrick at pallas.us Fri Feb 2 08:04:11 2007 From: derrick at pallas.us (Derrick Lyndon Pallas) Date: Fri Feb 2 08:04:49 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Should microformat features (like rel-tag) have explicit scope? In-Reply-To: <21e770780702020609q319ecc60h96ec84640f656f75@mail.gmail.com> References: <45C15975.6060304@pallas.us> <45C2190B.6030604@pallas.us> <45C29E93.3050506@pallas.us> <21e770780702020609q319ecc60h96ec84640f656f75@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <45C360FB.7090001@pallas.us> Brian Suda wrote: > Does that make sense? That's what I get for using someone else's example. Still, no one has responded to the more fundamental concern that rel-tag is not reusable for things like lists of bookmarks. (Or does someone really find it helpful that a "page has content about X" can just mean that a "page has a bookmark to X; or at least it did when I indexed the page, I guess its not there anymore because it rolled off.") ~D From andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk Fri Feb 2 06:29:23 2007 From: andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk (Andy Mabbett) Date: Fri Feb 2 08:12:36 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] [hCite] call for examples: language In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: In message , Michael McCracken writes >> > >Nice, those are good examples Thank you. > - they do mark up the language of the >citation itself, but don't mention the language of the cited object >(presumably because it's easy to deduce) - was that intentional or >just following established practice? Following the house style of the paper magazine in which the article first appeared. Though I am reminded that I still have to figure out which language some of them are in! >Also, could you add those examples to the citation-examples & >citation-examples-markup wiki pages (if they're not already there)? Will do, though of course you could, too! >In my experience, established practice is that the language is not >explicitly stated, and if it is, the case of a citation printing a >title in one language that is referring to an item in a different >language (eg, printing the title of a german book in english) is >rare. I may be rare, but it does happen. "Mein Kampf" in English is still titled "Mein Kampf" >So if the evidence confirms my suspicion that it's really rare to need >to mark up the language of (for example) the book separately from the >language of the words in the book's title, then can we just say that >the language is inferred from the @lang property of the hcite element? No! Only from a hreflang attribute, if present. Note my previous examples. >(And hence, drop the 'language' field from the hCite straw format?) I still don't think that that are anywhere near enough examples, especially of non-English-language sources, to be confident that it's not widely used. -- Andy Mabbett * Say "NO!" to compulsory ID Cards: * Free Our Data: * Are you using Microformats, yet: ? From derrick at pallas.us Fri Feb 2 08:17:01 2007 From: derrick at pallas.us (Derrick Lyndon Pallas) Date: Fri Feb 2 08:17:52 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Should microformat features (like rel-tag) have explicit scope? In-Reply-To: References: <45C15975.6060304@pallas.us> <45C2190B.6030604@pallas.us> <45C29E93.3050506@pallas.us> Message-ID: <45C363FD.8030402@pallas.us> Ciaran McNulty wrote: > The tag applying to the page just means that there's something on the > page relevant to that tag. And there is - the del.icio.us feed! The tag applies to the link; not the content, and certainly not the whole contents of the page. If I search for "pages with tag foo" and a page with a link to something tagged foo comes up, that's not what I wanted. > Can you expand on the reasons? > > Basically, if a page has a blog entry about Cats and an hCard in the > category 'Dogs' on it, why can't that page validly be tagged with > 'cats' and 'dogs'? It can be. But xFolk and hReview, etc., specifically change the semantics of rel-tag in their definitions. The problem is that there is no way to tell where that semantic shift ends (i.e. what scope it has) without understanding xFolk and hReview. Are we going to require all old microformat parsers to understand all new microformats? > I haven't looked at the different scoping proposals and certainly I'm > not saying yours is bad, I'm questioning the need to complicate what > is after all an incredibly simple format. "Consistency - the design must not be inconsistent. A design is allowed to be slightly less simple and less complete to avoid inconsistency. Consistency is as important as correctness." ~D From joe at andrieu.net Fri Feb 2 08:22:00 2007 From: joe at andrieu.net (Joe Andrieu) Date: Fri Feb 2 08:22:04 2007 Subject: Moderation [was RE: [uf-discuss] Andy Mabbet's moderation] In-Reply-To: <302C91FD-0589-4A05-A820-3E93D2F566AF@lava.net> Message-ID: <002701c746e6$455d18e0$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> Colin Barrett wrote: > Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 4:05 AM > To: Microformats Discuss > Subject: Re: Moderation [was RE: [uf-discuss] Andy Mabbet's > moderation] > > > On Feb 1, 2007, at 12:53 PM, Joe Andrieu wrote: > > > And to say that the community had a say in Tantek's > > action is about as valid as saying the American public had a say in > > George Bush's recent troop increase. > > You are treading dangerously close to invoking Godwin's Law[1] here, > and a number of other places in your recent messages. > > I'd ask that you refrain from this sort of thing. It's certainly > possible to address these issues without comparisons like > that, and it > would certainly be welcome, I think, by all involved. > > Again, in general, I've found your tone to be disrespectful to the > integrity of all members of this list, by implying that we > would allow > a tyrannical "government" to rule over the unknowing masses, and > particularly to the outstanding administrators of this list, > who have > been *extremely* measured in their response to many members of this > list, something for which I applaud them -- having been on the other > side of the coin it's extremely easy to just remove someone from the > equation, but they have bent over backwards (IMO) to > accommodate Andy, > calling them dictators totally unnecessary just plain incorrect on a > variety of levels. I appreciate your point. And certainly will recalibrate my comments to help facilitate rather than inflame. For the record, you will note that I haven't invoked either terms mentioned in Godwin's law. A few points: 1. I was not the first to refer to the leadership of uF as a dictatorship. 2. The admin list is secret and they do police this list. For any reasonable observer, that makes them secret police. > Is there room for improvement? Always. Is this the place to > talk about > it? Probably. Is comparing them to a secret police or to an > unpopular > sitting American president necessary or helpful to the debate? > Probably not. The Bush reference was definitely more personal than merited. You were right to call me on it. However, I stand by the point of that comment--a simple assertion that the "community" participated in a decision doesn't make it so, especially when members of that community voiced, and continue to voice, opposition that remains unaddressed. I also stand by the secret police phrasing. As a term, perhaps it is inflammatory. I'm ok with that. Let me explain why. Here's a qoute from IRC yesterday[2]: # [19:59:34] i'd like to get the membership of the -admin list documented in the wiki so we can stop seeing hyperbole like "secret police" # [20:01:13] This FAQ seems like the best place to put a list: http://microformats.org/wiki/faq#Q:_Who_controls_microformats.3F # [20:02:05] does anyone mind if i start a list there, without including anyone who hasn't already publicly declared their participation on the -admin list? # [20:02:33] tantek, kingryan, bewest, briansuda, KevinMarks? First, thanks, Scott, for initiating that change. Second, why exclude anyone who "hasn't already publicly declared their participation?" There is a culture of secrecy here that is the core of my issue. Why such secrecy? Why should anyone be allowed to be an admin in this community if they are only willing to do so secretly? I want to be clear here. This is not about a witch hunt or empty rebellion. The leadership has NO external checks and balances. Even the most private non-profit organization in the united states (I can't speak for other jurisdictions), must hold to certain standards about their leadership, their decision making, and directing the actions of the group for the benefit of society. Microformats has none of that. It is, rather, a private club that hasn't done such a good job at transparency with its constituency. Third, although few people like a gadfly, it appears that my efforts are making some sort of difference, as evidenced by the IRC above and changes to the wiki. Following Ben's argument, all evidence suggests my opposition is "working". That said, I do take your criticisms to heart and will make an effort to be more diplomatic. I think there is an opportunity for uF to thrive. It is instead alienating, based on feedback I've received, not only from Andy, and not only through this list. We can do better. -j > [1] http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/G/Godwins-Law.html [2] http://rbach.priv.at/Microformats-IRC/2007-02-01#T195934 -- Joe Andrieu joe@andrieu.net +1 (805) 705-8651 From brian.suda at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 08:27:22 2007 From: brian.suda at gmail.com (Brian Suda) Date: Fri Feb 2 08:27:26 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Should microformat features (like rel-tag) have explicit scope? In-Reply-To: <45C360FB.7090001@pallas.us> References: <45C15975.6060304@pallas.us> <45C2190B.6030604@pallas.us> <45C29E93.3050506@pallas.us> <21e770780702020609q319ecc60h96ec84640f656f75@mail.gmail.com> <45C360FB.7090001@pallas.us> Message-ID: <21e770780702020827s29da5c0ev5b560cae443ee756@mail.gmail.com> On 2/2/07, Derrick Lyndon Pallas wrote: > Still, no one has responded to the more fundamental concern that rel-tag > is not reusable for things like lists of bookmarks. --- i think the issue might be with what you WANT rel-tag to be and what it is? at the moment rel-tag would say "this page as content about X". That is ALL rel-tag knows about and that is all a rel-tag spider is concerned with. > (Or does someone > really find it helpful that a "page has content about X" can just mean > that a "page has a bookmark to X; or at least it did when I indexed the > page, I guess its not there anymore because it rolled off.") ~D It doesn't matter if it is a bookmark, blog post, hAtom entry, hCalendar or hResume, etc. A rel-tag applies to the page. Organizations like Icerocket, Technorati and others index TAGS all they are conserned with is getting you to the data. (freshness of that data is another problem, sure things might roll off, but things might go 404 too! that's life) I'm not sure what you mean when you say "is not reusable for things like lists of bookmarks." why not? when a rel-tag spider comes around and finds the tags it gets indexed in one way. When a bookmark/xFolk spider comes along it indexes things differently. I get the feeling you want both the rel-tag and bookmark spiders to index it in the exact same way? At the moment this is NOT how rel-tag works. Do you have a specific use-case or URL you want us to look at? otherwise we should stay away from hypothetical what ifs. -brian -- brian suda http://suda.co.uk From drernie at opendarwin.org Fri Feb 2 08:53:09 2007 From: drernie at opendarwin.org (Dr. Ernie Prabhakar) Date: Fri Feb 2 08:53:28 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Re: Moderation & Governance In-Reply-To: <002701c746e6$455d18e0$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> References: <002701c746e6$455d18e0$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> Message-ID: <74B30A3B-46CD-422D-838D-A17F9408FCEF@opendarwin.org> Hi Joe, On Feb 2, 2007, at 8:22 AM, Joe Andrieu wrote: > Third, although few people like a gadfly, it appears that my > efforts are > making some sort of difference, as evidenced by the IRC above and > changes to the wiki. Following Ben's argument, all evidence > suggests my > opposition is "working". > > That said, I do take your criticisms to heart and will make an > effort to > be more diplomatic. I think there is an opportunity for uF to thrive. > It is instead alienating, based on feedback I've received, not only > from > Andy, and not only through this list. We can do better. I do welcome your efforts to be a gadfly, and I welcome even more your commitment to be more diplomatic. :-) I also encourage people to post suggestions/votes/data on the relevant wiki pages, to help push us towards a constructive solution: * http://microformats.org/wiki/faq#Q:_Who_controls_microformats.3F * http://microformats.org/wiki/issues#Governance_Issues I would also like to revive the idea of a "meta-discuss" list to handle governance and other non-technical issues. This appears to be off-topic for the current wiki page on mailing lists for new micorformats: * http://microformats.org/wiki/mailing-lists-proposals#microformats-meta So, can anyone suggest the appropriate venue for proposing/discussing that? -- Ernie P. From davidjanes at blogmatrix.com Fri Feb 2 10:12:25 2007 From: davidjanes at blogmatrix.com (David Janes) Date: Fri Feb 2 10:12:29 2007 Subject: Moderation [was RE: [uf-discuss] Andy Mabbet's moderation] In-Reply-To: <002701c746e6$455d18e0$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> References: <302C91FD-0589-4A05-A820-3E93D2F566AF@lava.net> <002701c746e6$455d18e0$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> Message-ID: <21e523c20702021012r50caf239q8528541313132cd1@mail.gmail.com> On 2/2/07, Joe Andrieu wrote: > I want to be clear here. This is not about a witch hunt or empty > rebellion. The leadership has NO external checks and balances. Even the > most private non-profit organization in the united states (I can't speak > for other jurisdictions), must hold to certain standards about their > leadership, their decision making, and directing the actions of the > group for the benefit of society. Microformats has none of that. It > is, rather, a private club that hasn't done such a good job at > transparency with its constituency. I'm certainly sympathetic to the concerns of both sides here, but man, there's only so many hours in a day to read mailing lists. I really wish there was a -meta or -governance or -process [1] list where these discussions took place. Regards, etc... David [1] http://microformats.org/wiki/mailing-lists-proposals#microformats-process -- the paragraph describing this doesn't really seem to be what I'm talking about here though. -- David Janes Founder, BlogMatrix http://www.blogmatrix.com http://blogmatrix.blogmatrix.com From michael.mccracken at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 10:26:48 2007 From: michael.mccracken at gmail.com (Michael McCracken) Date: Fri Feb 2 10:26:52 2007 Subject: Moderation [was RE: [uf-discuss] Andy Mabbet's moderation] In-Reply-To: <21e523c20702021012r50caf239q8528541313132cd1@mail.gmail.com> References: <302C91FD-0589-4A05-A820-3E93D2F566AF@lava.net> <002701c746e6$455d18e0$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> <21e523c20702021012r50caf239q8528541313132cd1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 2/2/07, David Janes wrote: > On 2/2/07, Joe Andrieu wrote: > > I want to be clear here. This is not about a witch hunt or empty > > rebellion. The leadership has NO external checks and balances. Even the > > most private non-profit organization in the united states (I can't speak > > for other jurisdictions), must hold to certain standards about their > > leadership, their decision making, and directing the actions of the > > group for the benefit of society. Microformats has none of that. It > > is, rather, a private club that hasn't done such a good job at > > transparency with its constituency. > > I'm certainly sympathetic to the concerns of both sides here, but man, > there's only so many hours in a day to read mailing lists. I really > wish there was a -meta or -governance or -process [1] list where these > discussions took place. Amen. I would be happy to subscribe to a -meta list and check it once in a while, but having it mixed in with the actual work is exhausting. -mike -- Michael McCracken UCSD CSE PhD Candidate research: http://www.cse.ucsd.edu/~mmccrack/ misc: http://michael-mccracken.net/wp/ From bewest at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 10:46:46 2007 From: bewest at gmail.com (Benjamin West) Date: Fri Feb 2 10:46:50 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Re: Moderation & Governance In-Reply-To: <74B30A3B-46CD-422D-838D-A17F9408FCEF@opendarwin.org> References: <002701c746e6$455d18e0$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> <74B30A3B-46CD-422D-838D-A17F9408FCEF@opendarwin.org> Message-ID: <8ad71be30702021046i5d4dbad0y2f9ea2022c63a437@mail.gmail.com> > > * http://microformats.org/wiki/faq#Q:_Who_controls_microformats.3F > * http://microformats.org/wiki/issues#Governance_Issues > > I would also like to revive the idea of a "meta-discuss" list to > handle governance and other non-technical issues. This appears to be > off-topic for the current wiki page on mailing lists for new > micorformats: > > * http://microformats.org/wiki/mailing-lists-proposals#microformats-meta > > So, can anyone suggest the appropriate venue for proposing/discussing > that? > > -- Ernie P. Ernie, Thanks. I think you nailed it. Let's try to keep -discuss on-topic. Issues can go on either the to-do page or on . Joe, There are people on the -admin list who are not considered admins. These include service providers and other influential contacts. In addition, Ryan and I have had conversations about how the admins are cautious to make changes without seeking feedback and corroboration with others. This includes not [mis]representing others, which I believe Scott was doing. However, this also means that there won't be any broad sweeping changes overnight. I can assure you that all of the admins will be apropriately listed on the wiki page. Until that list is complete, my original suggestion remains: you can create the list of active admins by looking at the IRC logs. If you can be persistent in your criticisms without resorting to hyberbolic imagery, it would allow, at least, me, more strongly consider your points. As for the policing metaphor, it's simply not true. There is no policing of the list that I'm aware of. Andy's moderation was a public decision, as have all the other decisions I'm aware of. Voting for many things takes place on the wiki. If you feel that there are policies or information that are unclear, I encourage you to ask about them, or perhaps bring them up on the issues page mentioned earlier. Finally, I'd like to encourage posts to this list to remain on-topic, lest we devolve into senseless bickering. Thanks, Ben West From scott at randomchaos.com Fri Feb 2 11:10:10 2007 From: scott at randomchaos.com (Scott Reynen) Date: Fri Feb 2 11:10:37 2007 Subject: Moderation [was RE: [uf-discuss] Andy Mabbet's moderation] In-Reply-To: <002701c746e6$455d18e0$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> References: <002701c746e6$455d18e0$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> Message-ID: <3644446B-2787-4079-91C1-A63B8C8EB87E@randomchaos.com> On Feb 2, 2007, at 10:22 AM, Joe Andrieu wrote: > Second, why exclude anyone who "hasn't already publicly declared their > participation?" For the same reason I don't publish personal emails to me: I respect others' privacy. I believe it's their decision to make, not mine. > There is a culture of secrecy here that is the core of > my issue. Why such secrecy? Why should anyone be allowed to be an > admin > in this community if they are only willing to do so secretly? I don't believe anyone has said they are only willing to participate in the -admin list secretly. But a few haven't said anything at all, I assume because they're busy people. I expect they'll be happy to add their names to the public registry when they get around to checking their email relating to the volunteer position. Or maybe they'll see you've been calling them "secret police" with a connotation [1] that they would take someone away in the middle of the night to be murdered, and decide it was a mistake volunteering in the first place. Either way, give it a little time and I expect the published list will soon reflect everyone on the list. Peace, Scott [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_police From doctormo at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 12:02:59 2007 From: doctormo at gmail.com (Martin Owens) Date: Fri Feb 2 12:03:06 2007 Subject: Moderation [was RE: [uf-discuss] Andy Mabbet's moderation] In-Reply-To: <3644446B-2787-4079-91C1-A63B8C8EB87E@randomchaos.com> References: <002701c746e6$455d18e0$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> <3644446B-2787-4079-91C1-A63B8C8EB87E@randomchaos.com> Message-ID: <69ff73b20702021202xa94917avbb9fba7fdd393fc8@mail.gmail.com> On 02/02/07, Scott Reynen wrote: > > I don't believe anyone has said they are only willing to participate > in the -admin list secretly. But a few haven't said anything at all, > I assume because they're busy people. I expect they'll be happy to > add their names to the public registry when they get around to > checking their email relating to the volunteer position. Or maybe > they'll see you've been calling them "secret police" with a > connotation [1] that they would take someone away in the middle of > the night to be murdered, and decide it was a mistake volunteering in > the first place. Either way, give it a little time and I expect the > published list will soon reflect everyone on the list. > Perhaps some sort of page explaining not only who is in a restricted group, why and how other community members can join may also be information that would put fears at ease. Do we have admin minutes? cat we read the logs for -admin? all of the interactions within the administration of an organisation even a sudo one need to be made public where they interact with the public. A page dedicated to who is banned, moderated, for how long and _why_ might be helpful too. Best Wishes, Martin Owens From bewest at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 13:17:28 2007 From: bewest at gmail.com (Benjamin West) Date: Fri Feb 2 13:17:34 2007 Subject: Moderation [was RE: [uf-discuss] Andy Mabbet's moderation] In-Reply-To: <69ff73b20702021202xa94917avbb9fba7fdd393fc8@mail.gmail.com> References: <002701c746e6$455d18e0$0301a8c0@andrieuhome> <3644446B-2787-4079-91C1-A63B8C8EB87E@randomchaos.com> <69ff73b20702021202xa94917avbb9fba7fdd393fc8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8ad71be30702021317x37f46489k58d6a759ca1e1eb9@mail.gmail.com> On 2/2/07, Martin Owens wrote: > On 02/02/07, Scott Reynen wrote: > > > > I don't believe anyone has said they are only willing to participate > > in the -admin list secretly. But a few haven't said anything at all, > > I assume because they're busy people. I expect they'll be happy to > > add their names to the public registry when they get around to > > checking their email relating to the volunteer position. Or maybe > > they'll see you've been calling them "secret police" with a > > connotation [1] that they would take someone away in the middle of > > the night to be murdered, and decide it was a mistake volunteering in > > the first place. Either way, give it a little time and I expect the > > published list will soon reflect everyone on the list. > > > > Perhaps some sort of page explaining not only who is in a restricted > group, why and how other community members can join may also be > information that would put fears at ease. > > Do we have admin minutes? cat we read the logs for -admin? all of the > interactions within the administration of an organisation even a sudo > one need to be made public where they interact with the public. > > A page dedicated to who is banned, moderated, for how long and _why_ > might be helpful too. > > Best Wishes, Martin Owens Martin: You make some good points... Can you add it to the -issues page described by Ernie? Thanks, Ben From john at westciv.com Thu Feb 1 16:51:16 2007 From: john at westciv.com (John Allsopp) Date: Fri Feb 2 14:48:46 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Vote on this: rel="me self" to indicate an authoritative hCard In-Reply-To: References: <003401c73f61$de549050$69fa030a@andrieuhome> <923a87360701240651i57ca37cfh71120c7522937ed9@mail.gmail.com> <35CA15FC-C4E8-4119-8DB9-B03087196C3A@ben-ward.co.uk> <4E413EDE-9EA9-4645-BF58-59959F11BDCC@westciv.com> <1bc4603e0701301150r53f839bwc59face093b72342@mail.gmail.com> <31CE5291-B702-4A6E-A86B-D8F1328C7A76@ben-ward.co.uk> Message-ID: <6DF6FC64-88D9-4606-9D6E-5AF649389E85@westciv.com> Andy, (apologies for the tardiness, I'm in one of those old fashioned, unconnected airomoplanes) > "me self" can't be anything but tautological; nor is it appropriate > when > referring to third parties. so: in English, it is tautological. But restricting the words to their roles in XFN and Atom, they mean quite different things - so I'd respectfully argue that the construction isn't in this context tautological. The third party issue (I take it to mean that you can't refer to an authoritative third party hCard for someone else using m, which is quite correct). I think that's a separate and more complex issue - how, if at all, can you link to an authoritative hCard for someone else. Is there a use case - sure - for example, at our conference sites, we markup speakers with hCard, and this often includes a link to their blog etc. In this case, a link to an authoritative (or perhaps, to be even less strict "detailed") hCard may be somethign that is very useful. > -1 > > but isn't this sort of voting better done on the wiki than in a > mailing > list? "rough consensus" - many more people see this mailing list regularly than visit the wiki frequently (I'd suggest) so for gaining a sense of rough consensus in a shortish timeframe (my original +1 was informal) the mailing list does seem to me to be an appropriate location for such straw polls. j From john at westciv.com Thu Feb 1 16:58:40 2007 From: john at westciv.com (John Allsopp) Date: Fri Feb 2 14:48:58 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Authenticity of Authoritative hCard (was: Re: Vote on this: rel="me self" to indicate an authoritative hCard) In-Reply-To: References: <003401c73f61$de549050$69fa030a@andrieuhome> <1bc4603e0701301150r53f839bwc59face093b72342@mail.gmail.com> <31CE5291-B702-4A6E-A86B-D8F1328C7A76@ben-ward.co.uk> <21e523c20701310637q7d0a5c6fx4790b484469b8b21@mail.gmail.com> <923a87360701310649h3d054d78k45f8c1a6de18602c@mail.gmail.com> <4056BE37-93ED-4236-AE61-5DB444B5972C@ben-ward.co.uk> <923a87360701310750p3808ce6bp138e9ca7dfdeb7e6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Andy, vCard has the property key - and so too does therefore hCard. vCard defines key (more or less, no cnnection this moment to quote directly) Specifies the public key or authentication certificate associated with the entity the vcard represents thanks j On 31/01/2007, at 8:41 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote: > In message > <923a87360701310750p3808ce6bp138e9ca7dfdeb7e6@mail.gmail.com>, Ara > Pehlivanian writes > >> what if someone registers ben-ward.net and puts up a fake >> card on that site. > > Perhaps we need a "class="pgp-public-key" property for hCard? > > ;-) > > -- > Andy Mabbett > > > Welcome to the 28-day week! > _______________________________________________ > microformats-discuss mailing list > microformats-discuss@microformats.org > http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss From ara.pehlivanian at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 14:57:56 2007 From: ara.pehlivanian at gmail.com (Ara Pehlivanian) Date: Fri Feb 2 14:57:59 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Vote on this: rel="me self" to indicate an authoritative hCard In-Reply-To: <6DF6FC64-88D9-4606-9D6E-5AF649389E85@westciv.com> References: <003401c73f61$de549050$69fa030a@andrieuhome> <923a87360701240651i57ca37cfh71120c7522937ed9@mail.gmail.com> <35CA15FC-C4E8-4119-8DB9-B03087196C3A@ben-ward.co.uk> <4E413EDE-9EA9-4645-BF58-59959F11BDCC@westciv.com> <1bc4603e0701301150r53f839bwc59face093b72342@mail.gmail.com> <31CE5291-B702-4A6E-A86B-D8F1328C7A76@ben-ward.co.uk> <6DF6FC64-88D9-4606-9D6E-5AF649389E85@westciv.com> Message-ID: <923a87360702021457w24d750cch9a5e02519c7380ca@mail.gmail.com> On 2/1/07, John Allsopp wrote: > use case - sure - for example, at our conference sites, we markup > speakers with hCard, and this often includes a link to their blog > etc. In this case, a link to an authoritative (or perhaps, to be even > less strict "detailed") hCard may be somethign that is very useful. If I understand the spec correctly, since a rel="me" is symmetric, shouldn't the hCard you're pointing to also be pointing back? If that's true, then the authoritative hCard will quickly get unmanageable since it will contain tens if not hundreds of reciprocal links to partial hCards (imagine if you're listed in several different locale directories marked up with hCard). A. From ara.pehlivanian at gmail.com Fri Feb 2 15:02:11 2007 From: ara.pehlivanian at gmail.com (Ara Pehlivanian) Date: Fri Feb 2 15:02:14 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Authenticity of Authoritative hCard (was: Re: Vote on this: rel="me self" to indicate an authoritative hCard) In-Reply-To: References: <003401c73f61$de549050$69fa030a@andrieuhome> <21e523c20701310637q7d0a5c6fx4790b484469b8b21@mail.gmail.com> <923a87360701310649h3d054d78k45f8c1a6de18602c@mail.gmail.com> <4056BE37-93ED-4236-AE61-5DB444B5972C@ben-ward.co.uk> <923a87360701310750p3808ce6bp138e9ca7dfdeb7e6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <923a87360702021502q188e2f2foa2aad72c3e4a4471@mail.gmail.com> On 2/1/07, John Allsopp wrote: > vCard has the property key - and so too does therefore hCard. vCard > defines key (more or less, no cnnection this moment to quote directly) > > Specifies the public key or authentication certificate associated > with the entity the vcard represents So then that settles the issue of authentication. If a third party consumer that reads the hCard wants to validate its authenticity, it can simply use the key (if present). It could further match all linked hCard keys to validate the chain's integrity. N'est pas? A. From derrick at pallas.us Fri Feb 2 17:32:44 2007 From: derrick at pallas.us (Derrick Lyndon Pallas) Date: Fri Feb 2 17:33:05 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Should microformat features (like rel-tag) have explicit scope? In-Reply-To: <21e770780702020827s29da5c0ev5b560cae443ee756@mail.gmail.com> References: <45C15975.6060304@pallas.us> <45C2190B.6030604@pallas.us> <45C29E93.3050506@pallas.us> <21e770780702020609q319ecc60h96ec84640f656f75@mail.gmail.com> <45C360FB.7090001@pallas.us> <21e770780702020827s29da5c0ev5b560cae443ee756@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <45C3E63C.9030004@pallas.us> Brian Suda wrote: > I get the feeling you want both the rel-tag and bookmark spiders to > index it in the > exact same way? At the moment this is NOT how rel-tag works. > > Do you have a specific use-case or URL you want us to look at? > otherwise we should stay away from hypothetical what ifs. No, I don't want those spiders to behave the same way and I don't think I've been unclear on my reasoning behind this or my use-case, which has been presented several times. I'd rather not have wild guesses; therefore: I, as a consumer of rel-tags, would like a way to know when the specificity of a rel-tag changes without having to write down and check a list of formats that change it. I'm not suggesting that we change the semantics of rel-tag, I'm suggesting that we add a marker that indicates where other microformats begin so we can tell when the semantics of features change. At any rate, Tantek said today that it is a non-issue that comes up quite often, so at his request, I put a section on describing his explanation applied to my use-case, that of blogrolls. And for the record: yes, I do understand the difference between normative and positive specification. ~D From microformats at 200ok.com.au Fri Feb 2 21:39:43 2007 From: microformats at 200ok.com.au (Ben Buchanan) Date: Fri Feb 2 21:39:46 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] [rel-tag] File extensions (was Re: Operator & AUMP bugs...) Message-ID: <6ca82b0f0702022139t1c3a3690j38186012f15d4c7a@mail.gmail.com> Hi all, Just pulling this out to a new thread, since it's a bit buried and confusing where it was. > I'm pretty sure I'm doing the right thing here: > - the last path component [1] > - ignore trailing slashes [2] ... > > Personally, but not off topic, when I create web pages I prefer never > to show the extension for HTML content, roughly inspired by this [3] OK, I need to ask this... can a tag path include a file extension? The FAQ poses the question but there's no answer yet. http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-tag-faq#Tags_with_file_extensions I've had a look around and can't find a definitive answer - the wiki suggests that no, the tag target URL cannot end in a file extension. I'm prompted to ask since the new version of Blogger uses .html extensions on its "label" pages (why they didn't just say "tags" I cannot fathom). I'm wondering if this is valid. Sorry if this sounds like a stupid question, but the way I read it none of the current documentation actually gives a clear answer. I like definite answers over making informed wild guesses ;) cheers, Ben -- --- --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson From ryan at ryancannon.com Fri Feb 2 22:35:04 2007 From: ryan at ryancannon.com (Ryan Cannon) Date: Fri Feb 2 22:35:09 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] Re: [hCite] call for examples: language (Andy Mabbett) In-Reply-To: <200702021613.l12GDqnP005638@microformats.org> References: <200702021613.l12GDqnP005638@microformats.org> Message-ID: <0C0E6DBF-5097-402B-98E6-BDF8BAE35850@ryancannon.com> On Feb 2, 2007, at 11:13 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote: > I may be rare, but it does happen. "Mein Kampf" in English is still > titled "Mein Kampf" > >> So if the evidence confirms my suspicion that it's really rare to >> need >> to mark up the language of (for example) the book separately from the >> language of the words in the book's title, >> (And hence, drop the 'language' field from the hCite straw format?) > > I still don't think that that are anywhere near enough examples, > especially of non-English-language sources, to be confident that it's > not widely used. I'm going to suggest that a language field--for works where the title incorrectly implies the resources language--sits outside of the 80/20 for a citation microformat for a number of reasons: 1. According to our current evidence it's very rare 2. In some cases where it does occur (online resources) common HTML constructs (@hreflang) fulfill the need completely. 3. In many remaining contexts, language differences are unimportant for the user. E.g.: a scholar chasing the citations of a critique of French literature written in English will likely already know French. -- Ryan http://RyanCannon.com From sam.sethi at vecosys.com Sat Feb 3 02:27:25 2007 From: sam.sethi at vecosys.com (Sam Sethi) Date: Sat Feb 3 02:27:29 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] XMDP Profile and OpenID In-Reply-To: <1f2ed5cd0702020512j4a2206abt52a2d635bb3de11e@mail.gmail.com> References: <1f2ed5cd0702020512j4a2206abt52a2d635bb3de11e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <009f01c7477d$e6615110$4001a8c0@SETHI001> Hi below is an extract from my blog header. I have used the redirect trick to have my blog url www.vecosys.com authenticate against my Openid account. It got me thinking how could I get my hcard to be part of this process. The simplest is to have my landing page http://samksethi.myopenid.com contain microformats which is why I think sites like www.linkedin.com or www.jyte.com might work. For exmaple if LinkedIn used OpenID to log me in and then linked that to my profile page. http://www.linkedin/in/samsethi that would be a good start as all of the LinkedIn page contains hCard and hResume. Bu how can we get my XFN network to link with my openid in order to create a "trust list" related to my profile. I was wondering if could point my or could I use I guess all I want is a way to associate my opeid with em and my network. MY CURRENT HEADER Thanks in advance Sam Sethi | Entrepologist | blog: www.vecosys.com | skype: samksethi | This email is: [ ] bloggable [ ] ask first [X] private | From brian.suda at gmail.com Sat Feb 3 04:33:56 2007 From: brian.suda at gmail.com (Brian Suda) Date: Sat Feb 3 04:34:00 2007 Subject: [uf-discuss] [rel-tag] File extensions (was Re: Operator & AUMP bugs...) In-Reply-To: <6ca82b0f0702022139t1c3a3690j38186012f15d4c7a@mail.gmail.com> References: <6ca82b0f0702022139t1c3a3690j38186012f15d4c7a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <21e770780702030433l2421cdfbu4736985b2e8e422b@mail.gmail.com> On 2/3/07, Ben Buchanan wrote: > Hi all, > > Just pulling this out to a new thread, since it's a bit buried and > confusi