On [Nov 15], at [ Nov 15] 9:07 , Martin McEvoy wrote:
This is not a discussion of formats, it's a discussion of what people
do. How can you discuss creating a microformat if you're not
discussing what people are doing?
I cant answer that David, the discussion needs to be consolidated
and re-thought (the same as this discussion was)
I suggest everyone go back and re-examine (and potentially re-state)
their proposals in terms of how they address the problem statement for
the collected examples. That common ground seems to have been largely
lost in this discussion. It's easy to start talking around an assumed
definition of something as common as a comment, but it's crucial to
stay focused on real world examples. Before proposing markup for
nested comments, we should look at examples to see if that's a common
pattern. Before proposing markup for links back to the source, we
should look at the examples to see if such links commonly exist.
Maybe everyone has already done this, but it's hard to tell. Knowing
how our own proposals are based in the examples is not enough; for
this collaborative effort, we need to explain the connections to
everyone else.
--
Scott Reynen
MakeDataMakeSense.com
_______________________________________________
microformats-new mailing list
microformats-new@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
