[uf-discuss] hidden microformats

Tom Armitage tom.armitage at gmail.com
Fri Sep 29 02:04:06 PDT 2006

On 28/09/06, Paolo Negri <hungrylist at gmail.com> wrote:
> I won't provide partial uformats because I'm afraid of that the user
> can be confused by different versions of the data for the same
> event/person. I agree on that even a partial information is semantic,
> but since now the usage of uformats is more like a
> transformation/download of vcards/icalendar (and my application is
> likely to encourage this type of usage) than an highlighting of the
> semantic of the page, I just want to provide one version of these
> objects.

I don't think you should really focus on what the *current* use of
uformats is - let's face it, most web users aren't even aware of them
right now. I don't think users are confused by different versions of
data - for instance, on the "home page" of one site I've worked on, we
have some succinct descriptions of events; when you click through the
page, you have the fuller description. Both should be marked up as
microformatted data, imho. However, it's only the "full description"
that we submit to pingerati, for instance.

But there are still reasons for putting the ufs onto the limited
version, on the front-page - it provides a very simple scrapi to
upcoming events, for instance.

That said: if you've got multiple representations of the same data on
the same page (which I don't think you do, but wanted to check), then
it's probably confusing for a user from a visual/usability
perspective, let alone a uf one. That's the "design for humans first"
mantra... once that's sorted, it's not too hard to design for the
"machines second".

Usage vs purpose is chicken-and-egg, and I don't think you should
limit implementation based on current usage patterns.

> I don't think I'm going to add link to uformats because I like the
> idea to have them as a rich collateral presence of data on the page
> more than a sort of resource that need to be pointed. Obviously this
> is just my opinion and is related to this specific application
> perspective.

No, that sounds about right to me!

More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list