[uf-discuss] outstanding hCard and hCalendar issues resolved
(except dtend which needs your opinion!)
davidjanes at blogmatrix.com
Thu Aug 27 04:18:27 PDT 2009
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 3:26 AM, Tantek Çelik <tantek at cs.stanford.edu> wrote:
> All outstanding hCard and hCalendar issues have been resolved (except
> for dtend).
> If over the past several years you raised an issue on the wiki
> regarding hCard and/or hCalendar, or if you work on an hCard/hCalendar
> implementation, please take a look at:
> * http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard-issues-resolved
> * http://microformats.org/wiki/hcalendar-issues-resolved
> And review resolutions to see if you find anything you disagree with
> or anything left unresolved. Please make comments inline on issues
> and issue resolutions on the wiki.
> One issue in particular I want to draw your attention to:
> I have chosen to keep the "dtend" inconsistency issue *open* because I
> have changed my mind about what I think is the best resolution for it
> (based on additional evidence collected this year), and very much want
> authors and developers to review this issue, and add both their own
> research/evidence and opinions towards the goal of making the best
> decision for the community:
> I am incorporating the resolutions as follows:
> * Minor, informative, and clarifying brainstorming and resolutions
> will be applied to the existing hCard and hCalendar pages (often
> informative examples and FAQs)
> * Minor, normative changes and brainstorming that likely affect
> implementations will be made to 1.0.1 versions of hCard and hCalendar
> ** e.g. requiring implementation of the value-class-pattern.
> * Major changes and additions e.g. in brainstorming will be added to
> version 1.1 *drafts* for hCard and hCalendar
> ** e.g. beginning incorporation of stable draft vCard 4.0 properties
> into hCard 1.1
> ** I'll likely track and collect 1.1 additions first on respective
> *-brainstorming pages before actually writing up v1.1 drafts.
> Note that since hCard and hCalendar are or contain building blocks
> used by nearly every other compound microformat, it is highly likely
> that many of these resolutions and fixes will make their way into
> iterations of most other microformats (such as hReview, hAtom,
> hResume, etc.) thus if you're an editor of a microformat, you should
> review the resolutions as well.
> microformats-discuss mailing list
> microformats-discuss at microformats.org
And I'll just throw it out there that a hypothetical hAtom 0.2 is
waiting for everyone's opinion , quite frankly even if it's voting
"0 I don't have an opinion".
- we want to know _what_ should be included in hAtom 0.2
- we want to know _how_ to do those things
- some issues that people raised need expansion
My opinion is that I'd love to at least get the non-contentious stuff
(if such a thing exists in the uf world) out of the way and consider
doing a hAtom 0.2, then immediately start working for 0.3 with the
more tetchy problems.
More information about the microformats-discuss