Reuse

(Difference between revisions)

Jump to: navigation, search
(drafted separate page, included relation to burden of proof, criticism of invention)
Current revision (00:17, 31 March 2013) (view source)
(entry-title, see also)
 
(7 intermediate revisions not shown.)
Line 1: Line 1:
-
<h1> Reuse </h1>
+
<entry-title> Reuse </entry-title>
One of several microformats [[principles]].
One of several microformats [[principles]].
Line 14: Line 14:
Thus the burden of proof is always on those who wish to change or modify what already "works" to a great extent today.  One clear instance of this is microformats' re-use of existing implied schemas (based on research of real world [[examples]]) and looking at existing widely interoperable standards as a basis for vocabulary as noted above, rather than inventing new idealistic a priori schemas or inventing new terminology for concepts already named in existing formats.
Thus the burden of proof is always on those who wish to change or modify what already "works" to a great extent today.  One clear instance of this is microformats' re-use of existing implied schemas (based on research of real world [[examples]]) and looking at existing widely interoperable standards as a basis for vocabulary as noted above, rather than inventing new idealistic a priori schemas or inventing new terminology for concepts already named in existing formats.
 +
 +
== see also ==
 +
* [[principles]]
 +
* [[process]]

Current revision


One of several microformats principles.

microformats reuse building blocks from widely adopted standards:

In general "doing what already works" (i.e. re-use) is greatly valued over "changing everything and starting from scratch" (i.e. re-invention).

Thus the burden of proof is always on those who wish to change or modify what already "works" to a great extent today. One clear instance of this is microformats' re-use of existing implied schemas (based on research of real world examples) and looking at existing widely interoperable standards as a basis for vocabulary as noted above, rather than inventing new idealistic a priori schemas or inventing new terminology for concepts already named in existing formats.

see also

Reuse was last modified: Sunday, March 31st, 2013

Views