Re: [uf-discuss] Re: Microformats UI in Firefox 3
On 9/2/07 4:07 AM, Jamie Knight [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hiya, I am not so sure that introducing an extra div / element is the way forward as it is requiring even more of the authors. I tend to agree with Jamie's assessment. I was under the impression that part of the idea behind microformats was that the tools were to do the donkey work of the process. Certainly one way to put it. ;) Yes one of the goals of microformats is to be a bit more publisher-centric in design rather than parser-centric. That doesn't mean that we try to make things completely no work at all for publishers, because clearly we ask a little of them, but it does mean that we ask less of them than most other standards efforts, which ask publishers to learn new languages etc. See the principles for more on this: http://microformats.org/wiki/principles I know this isn't wonderfully helpful, as i am not suggesting an alternative (thats for far greater minds than my own) to me the thought of adding a div to my page is alot more of an ask than a few semantic class names. I feel that other may feel the same way. It is not only quite a lot to ask publishers to add another div to their pages, but actually undesirable from an overall user experience standpoint. *Publishers* of data can't know beforehand all the ways *users* of that data will want to use it. Hence we ask publishers to mark up data semantically, which enables *general* re-use. Rather than asking them to mark up data semantically and with verbs for *specific* re-uses. just a few thoughts, ^licks^ Jamie Lion Thanks Jamie Lion. In addition, I found this thread *very* difficult to follow, as at some points it seemed like there were implicit proposals for a taxonomy of possible user actions (a really bad idea to try to solve such a huge problem at this point) or perhaps even a microformat itself for possible user actions for which I've seen no research done etc. As far as discussing microformats user interface in browsers in general, please take a look at: http://microformats.org/wiki/user-interface#Browser_Integration Please consider adding concrete user interface ideas/screenshots, proposals, and even challenges/issues there so that we may have a better record of the latest version of a proposal along with critical analysis etc. Tantek ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Resoling the exclusive end date issue
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes There is an outstanding hCalendar issue [...] around the use of exclusive dtend for whole-day dates [...] which is also one of the concerns with the misuse of abbr. One of the proposed remedies is to create a new class in hCalendar (and other microformats requiring and end date), perhaps dtendinc (for inclusive date end) or dtendwhole (for whole-day date end), such that [...] parsers are instructed, when exporting iCalendars, to increment the date in order to generate the exclusive date-end required by iCalendar. As discussed previously [...] it would be sensible for this solution to be implemented, subject to the usual caveats about process and testing, before the watershed formed by the release of Firefox 3. This would also be in accordance with the stated microformats principle of lowering barriers for publishers: http://microformats.org/wiki/principles#lowering-barriers Is anyone interested in taking this forward? -- Andy Mabbett ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Resoling the exclusive end date issue
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes There is an outstanding hCalendar issue [...] around the use of exclusive dtend for whole-day dates [...] which is also one of the concerns with the misuse of abbr. One of the proposed remedies is to create a new class in hCalendar (and other microformats requiring and end date), perhaps dtendinc (for inclusive date end) or dtendwhole (for whole-day date end), such that [...] parsers are instructed, when exporting iCalendars, to increment the date in order to generate the exclusive date-end required by iCalendar. As discussed previously [...] it would be sensible for this solution to be implemented, subject to the usual caveats about process and testing, before the watershed formed by the release of Firefox 3. This would also be in accordance with the stated microformats principle of lowering barriers for publishers: http://microformats.org/wiki/principles#lowering-barriers Which accordance is not negated by this edit: http://microformats.org/wiki?title=principlesdiff=nextoldid=21064 -- Andy Mabbett ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
[uf-discuss] invisible content OK?
Hi, everybody! I'm a new enthusiast to the Microformats world. I volunteered to present them to our Web Standards meetup ( http://webstandards.meetup.com/122/ ), and now I'm frantically devouring the uF book and making slides. One question I haven't seen addressed is whether it's considered good practice to hide information from the as-displayed webpage while including it in the microformat. For instance, I may be making a chatty, informal blog entry - We're gonna meet at noon this Wednesday over tacos at Joe's. I want to make it a full, rich hCalendar entry for those who actually want to pull down a vCard for Joe's, yet I don't want to break up the chatty, informal flow of my narrative-style post by visibly including a lot of detail - Joe's zip code, etc. I'm imagining doing this by including tags like span class=street-address title=123 1st street style=display:none A live example is at http://catherinedevlin.blogspot.com/2007/08/microformats-talk.html (yes, I passed up an opportunity to embed an hReview there - I'm just starting) Is there a better way? Should I not be doing it at all? the uF book mentions that one reason for the demise of META tags is that, since they are invisible, they are rarely properly maintained - that's one cause for doubt. Yet it seems like there ought to be a way to do this. After all, one of the things I love about microformats is that they don't impose restrictions on what you write and how you write it - they can go anywhere HTML can go. Thanks for your thoughts, -- - Catherine http://catherinedevlin.blogspot.com/ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
