[uf-discuss] Format-of-Formats?

[Dr. Ernie Prabhakar]

Hi Joe,

> Is this format-of-formats already done?  If so, I apologize, can you
> point me to it?  If not, what has been done and would it be premature
> for me to start work on such a draft specification (after much
> feedback from everybody here, of course)?

This is actually an FAQ, and a fairly tricky one at that, since it is  
isomorphic to the problem of a "general purpose parser."  I believe  
Tantek has declared that discussion off-topic for this list, since it  
has the potential to be a never-ending rathole.  However, I can't  
find such a statement on the FAQ:

http://microformats.org/wiki/faq#Basic_Microformat_Questions

Tantek, is that in fact the policy, and is it documented somewhere?

That said, there are a few of us crazy enough to want to try, which  
I'm open to doing off-list if you're interested...

-- Ernie P.


On Mar 30, 2006, at 8:45 AM, Joe Reger, Jr. wrote:

> Hi All!
>
> I've been lurking for a while and truly appreciate all of the great
> work going into microformats right now!
>
> I saw a message on the Structured Blogging mailing list that got me
> thinking about a format-of-formats... a standard way to describe a
> format.  My thoughts are here:
>
> http://www.joereger.com/entry-logid7-eventid5003-Structured- 
> Blogging-FormatofFormats.log
>
> As I posted, I realized that I haven't checked in with Tantek and
> others regarding the concept of a format-of-formats.  I've seen a lot
> of Atom/RDF used.  I was a proponent of XML Schema a while back.  I've
> been dabbling with Xforms.  XUL is out there.
>
> My basic position is that we should be able to provide a common format
> for the description of a microformat.  By creating a standard to
> describe the formats we free toolmakers to create an implementation
> and then be done with it.  Once we have support from WordPress, MT,
> Drupal, LJ, etc then we can spawn microformats more quickly, requiring
> little or no development on the toolmaker part.  Toolmakers will
> compete by providing advanced features in their implementation (like
> CSS override hooks, see blog post).  Aggregators like
> Technorati/PubSub will be able to build advanced functionality on top
> of specific formats and will compete at that level.  For example,
> Technorati may create Technorati Music while PubSub may create PubSub
> Movies... their investment differentiates and end-users win.
>
> Is this format-of-formats already done?  If so, I apologize, can you
> point me to it?  If not, what has been done and would it be premature
> for me to start work on such a draft specification (after much
> feedback from everybody here, of course)?
>
> Thanks for getting me up to speed!  Keep up the great work!
>
> Best,
>
> Joe Reger
> _______________________________________________
> microformats-discuss mailing list
> microformats-discuss at microformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss