[uf-discuss] currency quickpoll results and suggested next step

[Mike Schinkel]

>> Otherwise, I think the simplest is that I remove your vote from the final
results.

Don't remove my vote! :)  I didn't vote for  "Currency unit/denomination
used identification" in order to get up to four, (at least one) others did.

-Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: microformats-discuss-bounces at microformats.org
[mailto:microformats-discuss-bounces at microformats.org] On Behalf Of
Guillaume Lebleu
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 12:14 PM
To: Microformats Discuss
Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] currency quickpoll results and suggested next step

Mike Schinkel wrote:
> My opinion is this sounds like a great idea!  Will you be doing the 
> edit on the current proposal?
>   
yes, I intend to do before the end of this week.
> I am surprised however at the number of people who felt "Currency 
> unit/denomination used identification" was important and it seems like 
> an edge case to me. I'm hoping that this become an optional aspect as 
> opposed to always required, and the same with amount, actually.
>   
I think that you can change your vote (assuming your re-vote from the same
machine and cookies are one and haven't been erased).
Let me know. Otherwise, I think the simplest is that I remove your vote from
the final results.
> Also, will the current spec worry about the other concerns so as not 
> to eliminate the possibility of including them later, or by asking am 
> I just removing the benefit of "focusing on the top 3" by asking?
>   
I suggest the current spec focuses on the top 3. The future will be moved to
a "2.0" page. Any concern that some aspects of the 1.0 spec are not be
forward-compatible with 2.0 is relevant for 1.0.

Guillaume
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss at microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss