[uf-discuss] Microformats search engine: virel
csarven at gmail.com
Mon Jul 7 12:01:20 PDT 2008
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 6:34 PM, Angus McIntyre <angus at pobox.com> wrote:
> Christian Heilmann wrote:
>> That's got nothing to do with microformats ...
> With due respect, I don't completely accept that. A case could be made
> that factors that influence people's adoption of microformats are
> legitimate topics for discussion. Uneasiness about the 'spammability' of
> addresses published in hCard is a deterrent to full adoption of that
> microformat for many users. While these considerations don't belong in the
> spec, they can usefully be mentioned in texts about the spec, such as
> 'getting started' guides.
>> ... when you really think
>> that any obfuscation like bla dot domain is not indexed by spammers then
>> you are in for a treat. There is no way to protect emails online without
>> hurting usability or accessibility. Don't waste your time with
>> pacifier button.
> Again, I'm not in complete agreement with you. My experience - and I have
> actually tested this, although not as rigorously or extensively as I'd
> like - is that very few spammers seem to be doing much de-obfuscation, and
> even trivial obfuscations _currently_ offer a good degree of protection.
> However, I don't expect that state of affairs to last, so it's a moot
>> What you put in microformats you should be happy with to be put out
>> there to be found, indexed and converted. Obfuscated microformats that
>> expect the reader technology to convert it before turning it for example
>> into a vcard are just a nuisance for the end user.
> of everything, with no extra work needed by the reader. However, I concede
> that that might not extend to screen readers (although choosing a sane,
> human-readable representation for the basic form can help here).
Actually, Christian is bang on with "There is no way to protect emails
online without hurting usability or accessibility."
I've documented a fair number of ways to obfuscate (depends on how you
interpret it) email addresses in source and they all have pros and
cons, and all are dependent on various factors .
>> ... This is about unearthing information we already publish and
>> make easier to access and re-use it, which is the opposite of
> OK, so there's an implicit challenge here. For users who are unwilling to
> expose their email address through hCard, what alternative mechanisms can
> microformats support? Many website owners use mail forms instead of
> publishing their email addresses. Is there a need for something like a
> simple 'rel=contactform' microformat to signal the availability and
> location of a mail contact form?
I would also stress that this is not a problem that microformats
should be solving. The principal in solving something like this is
also not solely about "emails" but any data for that matter (e.g., Do
you want the "bad" guys to know your fn and street-address?)
More information about the microformats-discuss