bbtommorris at gmail.com
Tue May 6 13:51:12 PDT 2008
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 9:24 PM, Gordon Oheim <gordon at onlinehome.de> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I was just reading a blog about bad use of Photoshop that linked to
> "not-safe-for-work" sites every now and then. Made me wonder if we could use
> a microformat that indicates "non-suitable for work" links and the likes? I
> could imagine a FF plugin that recognizes page elements tagged as nsfw and
> changes their display to none or something like that when you are at work.
> Could also use nsfc (for children). Google could crawl this and protect my
> unborn kids. What do you think? Useful?
This has been discussed before, and there was a consensus against
pushing it through the microformats process.
Instead, I've started up an 'unofficial' format that uses the W3C's
GRDDL profile specification to markup links which are not safe for
You shouldn't rely on a class name to protect children, though. It's
not designed for that. No amount of semantic markup (or indeed any
software mechanism) substitutes for parental responsibility. What NSFW
is designed for is more so that you can have links marked in such a
way that you might have a common interface element or scripted
behaviour added to the page that warns you not to click on an NSFW
link (on my site, I'm using a bold, red warning that's placed using
generated content, although having recently started doing jQuery, I
may change it to a little confirmation box).
More information about the microformats-discuss