[uf-discuss] Re: microformats for normal people, like my mum
davidjanes at blogmatrix.com
Thu Jun 28 06:48:03 PDT 2007
On 6/28/07, Pelle W <mejllistor at kodfabrik.se> wrote:
> I would say that Microformat = XML and therefor you say that "this reads
> microformats" as much as you can say "this reads XML".
Well, microformats are one thing and XML is another so Microformat !=
XML. Or do you mean "Terminology-wise/linguistically can be used in
the same", in which case I ask "does anyone say 'this reads XML'" as a
_marketing_ term. We already have a perfectly good technical name for
microformats, i.e. "microformats".
On 6/28/07, Toby A Inkster <mail at tobyinkster.co.uk> wrote:
> Contact-aware browser;
> Calendar-aware browser;
> Geo-aware browser;
Because whatever term is invented, it will probably take 5 years to
get into people's heads. Having a pile of different terms won't make
this process any easier and will probably hinder/kill it.
On 6/28/07, Tim Hodson <hodson.tim at googlemail.com> wrote:
> Microformats are bits of human readable data tagged so that a machine
> can do something with it. Tagging is already a common expression of a
> way of labelling content. content being many things, microformats
> being a way to tag many things.
> So how about tag-aware?
Because microformats are _not_ tags.
More information about the microformats-discuss