Document your work discoverably on the web or don't bother. Was Re: [uf-discuss] schema.org, microformats.org, hRecipe

[Tantek Çelik]

Derrick,

If something was "brought up on a regular basis by newcomers", provide the URLs, otherwise we are right to dismiss your assertion.

No one was "driven out". We've had to ban a few trolls for negative behaviors for fixed periods of time, but haven't had to do any such thing for over a year (maybe 2) now.

If you had "actual parsing uses-cases for such a feature as well as publishing use-cases", at what URL did you document them?

If you consider requiring documentation on the web/wiki and being rigorous as "elitism of uf.org" then, yes, you're not going to be very productive.

And you're right, developing microformats is not for everyone - only those that are willing to document their work and be scientific in their methods. If you consider "science" to be a cabal, then you're not going to find much sympathy and should take your name-calling elsewhere.

Document your work on discoverable URLs (preferably on the wiki) or don't bother complaining.

Tantek

-----Original Message-----
From: Derrick Pallas <derrick at pallas.us>
Sender: microformats-discuss-bounces at microformats.org
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 07:33:52 
To: Microformats Discuss<microformats-discuss at microformats.org>
Reply-To: Microformats Discuss <microformats-discuss at microformats.org>
Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] schema.org, microformats.org, hRecipe

Notice that they have an itemscope in HTML5, something many people 
talked about on microformats.org for years. A few years ago it was 
brought up on a regular basis by newcomers, about twice a year; said 
newcomers were then driven out of the community. So there was 
discussion, just not very nice nor very productive. When I worked for 
Alexa, I had actual parsing uses-cases for such a feature as well as 
publishing use-cases and I was one of those newcomers, not the first and 
not the last. Not everyone tried to follow the process but I did, to the 
same end. After everything, the elitism of uf.org turned me off to the 
whole effort. That's not to say uf.org isn't full of nice, intelligent 
people — it is — just that I decided not to waste my time trying to be 
in the cabal. And this email is not intended to beat a dead horse, just 
to share my own experiences. ~D


On 6/29/2011 2:55 AM, thomas lörtsch wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I don't want to discuss the schema.org effort in general here, although there surely is a lot to discuss about it. My question is how collaboration between Google.com and microformats.org is organized, where it's taking place, who is involved. I'm sure there is and has always been some informal exchange, since people happen to know each other, meet at confernces or other events etc, and of course that's fine with me. I was wondering though when I read the following statement in a transcript of the Schema.org BOF at SemTech 2011<http://www.w3.org/2011/06/semtech-bof-notes.html>:
>
>> [...]
>> Kevin Marks: Microformats says have a discussion first. You did that with hRecipe, so I'm surprsed to see you didnt go through that here. That'a the difference in phsilophy
>> Tantek Çelik: Google (Kavi in particular!) successfully worked with the open community on both hReview-aggregate and hRecipe - openly.
>> [...]
>> Kevin Marks: hRecipe was a great example of how Google can do this.
>> [...]
>
> This sounds like quite some conversations, discussions and thorough work. Now I wonder: how specifically did that "great" and "successfull" work "with the open community" go? Where did it take place? Who was involved? And what exactly was worked out?
> I won't hesitate to admit that I wasn't a very good editor of hRecipe since summer 2009 but I still am the editor as indicated on the hRecipe wikipage. I wasn't contacted by anyone regarding Rich Snippets, Schema.org or any other Google activity. Also I couldn't find any mention on the mailinglists or on the wiki. So, please: what's going on, what did I miss? Or how is this "open"?
>
> Since Schema.org now promotes a recipe vocabulary that is slightly different from hRecipe and also more elaborated I would like to discuss what to do about that: maybe analyze the differences, observe uptake, then align hRecipe where appropriate etc. But before I start to work on that I'd like to understand what happened until now.
>
> Cheers,
> Thomas Lörtsch
>
>
>
> °|´<  in pursuit of the gestalt of it all />
> ^^^
>
>
>_______________________________________________
> 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