[admin] Declaring end of thread (was Re: [uf-discuss] Comments from IBM/Lotus rep about Microformats)
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tantek Çelik [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I am ending this thread of 50 messages now That's interesting - with what authority do you declare end of thread. Isn't this supposed to be a community, and isn't that or the community to do? If there is an autocracy (or some other non-community based management system) here, then surely it should be openly and honestly documented? Parsing is OFF-TOPIC for microformats-discuss. Such discussions belong in microformats-dev. See the mailing-lists page on the wiki where this has been documented for quite some time: [...] And then - if you are not actually working on (i.e. coding) a parser, then please don't post until you are. So, parsing should only be discussed by people who are actively writing parsers? And someone proposing a microformat should not comment on how it is intended to be parsed? And someone using uFs in their mark-up, perhaps for the first time, should not ask questions about, nor comment on, how they are being parsed? If so, that would have made this conversation: http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-discuss/2006-September/005957.html illegal, resulting in the loss of the benefits gained form it. It would also prohibit the discussion of most use-cases, and would prohibit a proponent from answering questions about their proposed microformat. Also prohibited would be the reporting of bugs in parsers: http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-discuss/2006-September/005438.html Theoretical worries are not a priority. They may not be *your* priority, but few inventions or advancements could have been made, without some consideration of theoretical matters. 2. Use real world examples for discussions. Throughout this thread there have been numerous arguments based on strictly theoretical examples. The problem is we can waste ALL our time from now until forever discussing/worrying about theoretical examples and get nothing done. Your implication, that all theoretical examples result in time wasting, is unfounded. Theoretical examples are the equivalent to a DOS attack on actually getting things done. Such hyperbole! 3. Prefixing (e.g. vcard-) has already been considered and rejected for microformats in general. There have been deliberate exceptions made for one microformat (hAtom). I'm not going to spend the time re-arguing this now - I have added an item to my to-do list on the wiki to better document this. Thank you for making clear that it's currently not (well) documented. Are we to understand also, that every decision, once made, even if ill-documented, is irrevocable? Or should we deduce that, if deliberate exceptions can be made in one case, it is perfectly reasonable to suggest that deliberate exceptions be made in another? Put another way: how are we to resolve the clear inconsistency in your third point? -- Andy Mabbett * Say NO! to compulsory ID Cards: http://www.no2id.net/ * Free Our Data: http://www.freeourdata.org.uk * Are you using Microformats, yet: http://microformats.org/ ? ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
admins, prefix exceptions (was Re: [admin] Declaring end of thread (was Re: [uf-discuss] Comments from IBM/Lotus rep about Microformats))
On 12/9/06 12:11 PM, Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tantek Çelik [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I am ending this thread of 50 messages now That's interesting - with what authority do you declare end of thread. Isn't this supposed to be a community, and isn't that or the community to do? If there is an autocracy (or some other non-community based management system) here, then surely it should be openly and honestly documented? I am an admin on this list/site as is Ryan King. parsing discussion snipped because it is off topic for this list theoretical worries also snipped because they are not a priority for microformats 3. Prefixing (e.g. vcard-) has already been considered and rejected for microformats in general. There have been deliberate exceptions made for one microformat (hAtom). I'm not going to spend the time re-arguing this now - I have added an item to my to-do list on the wiki to better document this. Thank you for making clear that it's currently not (well) documented. Are we to understand also, that every decision, once made, even if ill-documented, is irrevocable? No. Or should we deduce that, if deliberate exceptions can be made in one case, it is perfectly reasonable to suggest that deliberate exceptions be made in another? Yes exceptions can be made but only with exceptionally good reasons. In the case of hAtom, you can read through the archives for the reasoning in depth, but in summary: since we were reusing the semantics of the IETF Atom standard, we very much wanted to reuse the vocabulary as well to minimize confusion and mean precisely the same semantics as defined in the Atom RFC 4287, and thus a few of the hAtom properties appear to be prefixed (entry-title, entry-content, entry-summary) in order to literally reuse those terms from the RFC (title, content, summary). Perhaps that would be a good hatom-faq entry. Thanks, Tantek ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
admins, prefix exceptions (was Re: [admin] Declaring end of thread (was Re: [uf-discuss] Comments from IBM/Lotus rep about Microformats))
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tantek Çelik [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I am ending this thread of 50 messages now That's interesting - with what authority do you declare end of thread. Isn't this supposed to be a community, and isn't that or the community to do? If there is an autocracy (or some other non-community based management system) here, then surely it should be openly and honestly documented? I am an admin on this list/site as is Ryan King. I know. That doesn't address my point. parsing discussion snipped because it is off topic for this list Your refusal to address my concerns and answer questions on the administration of *this list*, and its use by the community, is duly noted. theoretical worries also snipped because they are not a priority for microformats microformats is not a sentient entity, it cannot have a view on such matters. 3. Prefixing (e.g. vcard-) has already been considered and rejected for microformats in general. There have been deliberate exceptions made for one microformat (hAtom). I'm not going to spend the time re-arguing this now - I have added an item to my to-do list on the wiki to better document this. Thank you for making clear that it's currently not (well) documented. Are we to understand also, that every decision, once made, even if ill-documented, is irrevocable? No. Or should we deduce that, if deliberate exceptions can be made in one case, it is perfectly reasonable to suggest that deliberate exceptions be made in another? Yes exceptions can be made but only with exceptionally good reasons. So it's perfectly acceptable to make such a suggestion. Good. -- Andy Mabbett * Say NO! to compulsory ID Cards: http://www.no2id.net/ * Free Our Data: http://www.freeourdata.org.uk * Are you using Microformats, yet: http://microformats.org/ ? ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
false claim regarding relevance of topics on this list (was: [admin] Declaring end of thread (was Re: [uf-discuss] Comments from IBM/Lotus rep about Microformats))
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tantek Çelik [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes 1. Parsing is OFF-TOPIC for microformats-discuss. Furthermore, your assertion is not supported by: http://microformats.org/wiki/mailing-lists A mailing list for general discussion of microformats nor: http://microformats.org/discuss/ This is a public list for discussion of microformats. Unmoderated, open subscription. nor: http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss/ This is an open and public list for anyone interested in microformats. -- Andy Mabbett * Say NO! to compulsory ID Cards: http://www.no2id.net/ * Free Our Data: http://www.freeourdata.org.uk * Are you using Microformats, yet: http://microformats.org/ ? ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
