Draft to Specification (was: [uf-discuss] More than three years)
Toby A Inkster
mail at tobyinkster.co.uk
Thu Aug 28 03:41:46 PDT 2008
Yay! Finally the sort of discussion I was hoping to kick-start.
I think 'adr' and 'geo' should certainly be considered candidates for
promoting from drafts to specs - these have been stable for ages and
don't seem to have any issues raised (at least none which don't
effect hCard, or microformats in general). There have been plenty of
ideas proposed for extensions to them, but the current drafts
certainly address 80% of use cases. These can be deferred to a future
iteration which would address 80% of the remaining 20% of use cases.
(This would also address the anomaly that hCalendar, a full
specification, recommends that event locations may be marked up with
adr and geo, each of which are only drafts.)
And hAudio and figure are probably stable enough to go on the
"official drafts" list.
The Microformats process is extremely helpful in the early stages of
drafting a spec, taking the authors/editors through the process of
researching relevant examples, looking at existing standards,
narrowing down requirements to a simple, usable and deliverable set,
and building a draft vocabulary; but after that, the process leaves
you dangling: there is no defined process for knowing when to freeze
a spec, when to start asking for implementations, creating test
suites, publishing as a formal spec once you've got a few
implementations that pass the tests, restarting the effort for a v1.1
iteration, etc. [That was a very long sentence. I apologise to
readers: my writing style tends to favour run-ons.] The process
itself should be considered a product of the microformats community;
but the process does not yet cover 80% of use cases, so needs more work.
Toby A Inkster
<mailto:mail at tobyinkster.co.uk>
More information about the microformats-discuss