[uf-discuss] microformats for normal people, like my mum

Joe Andrieu joe at andrieu.net
Fri Jun 29 00:04:07 PDT 2007


I would suggest that attachments are definitely a bad idea. They imply opening or saving a completely separate document/file and
are, as you state, "danger" waiting to happen.



Bits being a combination of both bits/bytes and tidbits.

Someone somewhere is going to name this thing. It might be a journalist. It might be FF. It could be a blogger.

The idea that there is data embedded in a web page that the browser can consistently interact with beyond the hyperlink is new.
Especially when that embedding and the interactions are consistent across many many webpages, but not all web pages.  Users will
name it something. I think people understand "data" but rarely have a need to speak of data generally--we talk about contacts or
events or people or reviews.  

But when "my brain is full": it's got too much stuff. Too much data. I think people get that. Data is generalized digital bits in
some way that's useful. hCards, hCalendars, GEO, XFN and other uF or POSH generalize to data. Semantic data.

Of course, "bookmarks" were a pretty innovative metaphor.  Perhaps there is something completely different that works. Maybe
something from tidbits. Or morsels...

Anyway, good luck. I expect you might have more luck with the FF crew.


Joe Andrieu
SwitchBook Software
joe at switchbook.com
+1 (805) 705-8651 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: microformats-discuss-bounces at microformats.org 
> [mailto:microformats-discuss-bounces at microformats.org] On 
> Behalf Of Alex Faaborg
> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 11:40 PM
> To: Microformats Discuss
> Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] microformats for normal people, like my mum
> I've been giving some thought to framing microformatted content as  
> "attachments," along with a little paper clip icon.  This would  
> resonate with users who are familiar with email, but on the 
> downside,  
> a lot of people have been trained that attachments=danger.
> -Alex
> On Jun 28, 2007, at 11:29 PM, Pelle W wrote:
> > Paul Wilkins skrev:
> >> From: "Alex Faaborg" <faaborg at mozilla.com>
> >> |> Mozilla's user experience team is going to continue
> >> brainstorming the
> >>> best way to expose microformat detection to end users, along with
> >>> the rest of the mozilla community.  I'll post updates to this  
> >>> list from  time to time, and it will be interesting to see what  
> >>> interfaces and  names other people come up with as well.
> >> The RSS feeds are accessed in the browser through the feed 
> button. So 
> >> it makes sense that the microformat data should be accessed
> >> through the data button.
> >>
> >> I do like data, it's concise and is easy to explain.
> >>
> >> Q: What kind of data can I get from the data button?
> >> A: Contact details, calender entries, geographic locations, . . .
> >>
> >> Q: Does the data button always get the information?
> >> A: No, only when the page author has specially marked out those
> >> parts of the page.
> > Data sounds good but since RSS also is data the RSS-feed should
> > perhaps be reached from below the data-button to emphasize the  
> > similarities.
> >
> > / Pelle
> > _______________________________________________
> > microformats-discuss mailing list 
> > microformats-discuss at microformats.org
> > http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
> _______________________________________________
> microformats-discuss mailing list 
> microformats-discuss at microformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list