[uf-new] Recipe

Frances Berriman fberriman at gmail.com
Fri Sep 28 07:15:46 PDT 2007

On 27/09/2007, Taylor Cowan <taylor_cowan at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >non-food based recipes in the long run.
> Taken in the strict sense whenever we find a recipe format, we'll know a lot about the content.
> In "recipe for success" sense, recipe just means a set of steps.  That's not much more meaningful than a <ul> or <ol> list.  I hope the group doesn't allow that format to loose its flavor.

You're right.  I think there is a strong desire to be quite focused
about what exactly the recipe format should describe.  I know I've
made suggestions of marking up bombs, tutorials or how to knit
scarves, but I can see how that could water down what is trying to be
achieved.  BUT, I still think that if the recipe format is done
correctly, it won't necessarily exclude unusual uses.

What happens if we do want to mark-up something more unusual as a
guide as to how to make something non-edible?  Is that a question that
we're already declaring out of scope.  I think that's my query.

Should we scope this now so that research can be focused?  What are
our ultimate aims/problems to be solved?

Frances Berriman

More information about the microformats-new mailing list