Difference between revisions of "reuse"

From Microformats Wiki
reuse
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (pascadell)
m (Replace <entry-title> with {{DISPLAYTITLE:}})
 
(3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
caeltou
+
{{DISPLAYTITLE: Reuse }}
<h1> Reuse </h1>
 
  
 
One of several microformats [[principles]].
 
One of several microformats [[principles]].
Line 15: 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]]

Latest revision as of 16:32, 18 July 2020


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 Best Practices for Examples Pages) 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