On 1/28/07, Ben Buchanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I wasn't saying all business/clients were friends - my point was just that creating a "business only" microformat seems counter productive. I think XFN and XPN should be superseded by one single, combined relationships microformat which can cover all bases.
I agree here. The heart of XFN/XPN is to define your relationship with someone. However, they are both somewhat discriminate in regards to the types of relationships that can be defined. Instead I agree and support the notion that there should be a single relationship uF that embrace all relationship statuses (friendly, business, etc.). By being so broad, it would make the uF much more scalable than something that is more specific. This way we can keep discussions to agreed upon rel values.
If someone only wanted to show a friends network they could; if a company only wants to show business relationships they could do that too. Nobody would be alienated with a combined uf. I would happily see XFN extended with business relationships since it's only the name which prevents that happening. Rename it from "friends network" to "relationship network" or something and it's all good :)
Relationship network sounds good to me; it's to the point and not too specific.
To approach it another way - XFN is essentially just an addon to blogrolls. A business blogroll does not have any requirements that cannot be met by XFN's pattern - it's just that XFN is limited to a narrow set of "friend" relationships (although they spill over to professional as well, with colleague etc). We could extend XFN - which is already adopted by many people/sites - to include more values and avoid creating competing ufs. cheers, Ben
_______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
