[uf-new] Proposed Microformats: hRebuttal, hEvidence, hSource, hConclusion and hArgument

Danny Ayers danny.ayers at gmail.com
Fri May 25 11:19:06 PDT 2007

On 25/05/07, Colin Barrett <timber at lava.net> wrote:


I don't really disagree. I'm beginning to think perhaps beyond the
handful of core microformats already spec'd up, the creation of new
microformats will lead to diminishing returns because of the effort
needed to decide how they should be used together (and maintenance

> I suggest to start, write some plain ol' semantic HTML. Getting the
> markup out there is a good thing. Try to get people you know who run
> other BBSes or are interested to write other types of software that
> marks this stuff up. Get the makrup out on the web, and if it takes
> off, come back and we'll see.

Well that's the thing - as Keith has demonstrated, it's not actually
necessary to go the path of the microformats process to create HTML
with embedded data. Away from the "80%" (I quote it because the Long
Tail probably applies) the process could well be an impediment. Anyone
can create (or find) an RDF vocabulary, follow the rules of eRDF or
RDFa and get a parser and data handling tools for free, without all
the overhead of figuring out how the markup should work in combination
with existing vocabularies (because of the shared data model). As long
as reuse is encouraged, people with interests in the same domain will
tend towards shared vocabularies/formats. Altogether bottom-up &




More information about the microformats-new mailing list