Re: [uf-discuss] Authority (was: Text::Microformat - a uf parser for Perl)

[Charles Iliya Krempeaux]

Hello,

If the term "Microformat" does become a synonym for Semantic HTML
(with most people outside this group... and yeah, I've noticed to that
it looks like it already has)... I suppose we could start using the
terminology...

"Official Microformat" and "Unofficial Microformat"

Or something like that.


See ya

On 4/27/07, Keith Grennan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 07:40:01PM -0500, Scott Reynen wrote:
> On Apr 26, 2007, at 5:54 PM, Dr. Ernie Prabhakar wrote:
>
> >I realize you may not like that distinction, and we may or may not
> >have any ability to enforce that, but I think it is only reasonable
> >for us to attempt to enforce community standards, if only through
> >peer pressure.
>
> I agree.  I really hope "microformat" won't turn into just another
> term for "semantic HTML."  Clear communication is difficult enough
> already without additional ambiguity.

I think it already has.

It's like Adobe trying to control how people use the word 'photoshop'.

You end up with single interest group that keeps repeating "That thing
your refer to is not actually FooBar - these are the real FooBars over
here".  But no one else cares, because people will use language to suit
their needs.

As the popularity of the term microformat grows, you might have to look
for higher ground that's easier to defend.  Because really, who wants to
spend their time and energy being language police?

Keith

ps. I realize that I'm a newcomer to this community, so I hope I'm not
offending anyone.  Hopefully my comments are valuable as an outsider's
first impression.

>
> Peace,
> Scott
>


--
   Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.

   charles @ reptile.ca
   supercanadian @ gmail.com

   developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] Authority (was: Text::Microformat - a uf parser for Perl)

[Dr. Ernie Prabhakar]

Hi Andy,

On Apr 28, 2007, at 12:57 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote:

I can't  prevent people from calling cats "dogs" either, but I'm
certainly  going to say something when it happens.


This isn't case of people calling cats "dogs"; it's closer to the
dispute over whether a Jack Russell Terrier is a breed or a mongrel.


Trust  me -- you don't want to offend the Jack Russell lobby. :-)

http://www.dogbreedinfo.com/jackrussellterrier.htm

In fact, the analogy is actually pretty apt.  A breed association is  
nothing more than an association of people who are passionate about  
something to they point where they have decided to pursue and defend  
a particular definition.  Sure, eventually they get registered by the  
AKC so we recognize them as a "official", but the passionate pursuit  
exists (and is considered legitimate) even before the formal  
recognition. In fact, it is the very purity of their definition which  
entitles them to formal recognition.


Something to think about...

-- Ernie P.

http://www.akc.org/reg/fss_details.cfm
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] Authority (was: Text::Microformat - a uf parser for Perl)

[Andy Mabbett]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Scott
Reynen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes

>I can't  prevent people from calling cats "dogs" either, but I'm
>certainly  going to say something when it happens.

This isn't case of people calling cats "dogs"; it's closer to the
dispute over whether a Jack Russell Terrier is a breed or a mongrel.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
*  Say "NO!" to compulsory ID Cards:  
*  Free Our Data:  
*  Are you using Microformats, yet:  ?
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] Authority (was: Text::Microformat - a uf parser for Perl)

[Scott Reynen]

On Apr 27, 2007, at 9:54 AM, Keith Grennan wrote:


I agree.  I really hope "microformat" won't turn into just another
term for "semantic HTML."  Clear communication is difficult enough
already without additional ambiguity.


I think it already has.


Of the mentions of "microformats" I see outside this community, I  
think those that mean "semantic HTML" are probably around 20% and  
those that mean "semantic HTML standards developed through the  
microformats process" (i.e. what we generally mean around here) are  
closer to 80%.  So I'm still hopeful that we can retain a term that  
means the latter in common use.



It's like Adobe trying to control how people use the word 'photoshop'.


I'm confident "Adobe Photoshop" will still work when I need a term to  
refer to that particular piece of software, regardless of how often I  
use "photoshop" as a more generic verb.  I'm not as confident  
"microformat" will still work when I need a term to refer to  
standards created through the microformats process.  So I think the  
latter is actually a problem, whereas the former is just trademark  
lawyers with too much time on their hands.



You end up with single interest group that keeps repeating "That thing
your refer to is not actually FooBar - these are the real FooBars over
here".  But no one else cares, because people will use language to  
suit

their needs.


I completely agree that language can't be controlled, but as the  
community most actively using the term "microformat," I think we're  
in a good position to influence what people understand it to mean, if  
we care to try.


As the popularity of the term microformat grows, you might have to  
look

for higher ground that's easier to defend.


We may.  Unfortunately there are enough people who interpret  
"microformat" to mean more than Semantic HTML, that even high ground  
would still leave a lot of room for confusion.



Because really, who wants to
spend their time and energy being language police?


Not me.  But if someone is using a term in a way that doesn't make  
sense to me, and I want to communicate with them, I don't see  
alternative to saying "This is what I understand 'microformat' to  
mean. You seem to be describing something different."  I can't  
prevent people from calling cats "dogs" either, but I'm certainly  
going to say something when it happens.


Peace,
Scott

___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] Authority (was: Text::Microformat - a uf parser for Perl)

[Andy Mabbett]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dr. Ernie
Prabhakar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes

>On Apr 27, 2007, at 11:21 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote:
>> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dr. Ernie
>> Prabhakar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>>
 That's a point-of view, but not a definitive fact. Who says it's
 not a microformat? With what authority?
>>>
>>> Um, is there any authority you *would* accept for that usage?
>>
>> It doesn't matter what I do, or would, accept; it's what the wider
>> public would accept which is at issue.
>
>Well, that's the experiment we are currently performing: to see
>whether we (the microformats.orf community) can encourage the outside
>world to accept our definitions of microformats vs. POSH and semantic
>HTML.  You may not think we'll succeed, but I don't see that as a
>reason not to try.

Perhaps; but then my original post on this mater was to challenge a post
which appeared to imply we'd already succeeded.

It may also be wise to consider whether what we are offering is more or
less likely to be accepted, than an alternative offer we could be making
- we may only get one bite at that particular cherry.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
*  Say "NO!" to compulsory ID Cards:  
*  Free Our Data:  
*  Are you using Microformats, yet:  ?
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] Authority (was: Text::Microformat - a uf parser for Perl)

[Dr. Ernie Prabhakar]

Hi Andy,

On Apr 27, 2007, at 11:21 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote:

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dr. Ernie
Prabhakar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes


That's a point-of view, but not a definitive fact. Who says it's
not a microformat? With what authority?


Um, is there any authority you *would* accept for that usage?


It doesn't matter what I do, or would, accept; it's what the wider
public would accept which is at issue.


Well, that's the experiment we are currently performing: to see  
whether we (the microformats.orf community) can encourage the outside  
world to accept our definitions of microformats vs. POSH and semantic  
HTML.  You may not think we'll succeed, but I don't see that as a  
reason not to try.


-- Ernie P.


___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] Authority (was: Text::Microformat - a uf parser for Perl)

[Andy Mabbett]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dr. Ernie
Prabhakar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes

>> That's a point-of view, but not a definitive fact. Who says it's
>>not a microformat? With what authority?
>
>Um, is there any authority you *would* accept for that usage?

It doesn't matter what I do, or would, accept; it's what the wider
public would accept which is at issue.

>The "common usage" on this list is that "microformats" is best  applied
>that markup which follows the microformat process:
>
>> http://microformats.org/wiki/process
>
>and that other forms of semantic markup should be referred to as
>"semantic HTML" or POSH.

Indeed - but again, it's what happens *outside* this list which is at
issue.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
*  Say "NO!" to compulsory ID Cards:  
*  Free Our Data:  
*  Are you using Microformats, yet:  ?
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] Authority (was: Text::Microformat - a uf parser for Perl)

[Jeremy Keith]

Keith Grennan wrote:

I agree.  I really hope "microformat" won't turn into just another
term for "semantic HTML."  Clear communication is difficult enough
already without additional ambiguity.



I think it already has.

It's like Adobe trying to control how people use the word 'photoshop'.


It certainly seems to be heading that way. But now that we recognise  
this problem (it was discussed quite a bit at the microformats dinner  
in SF recently), we can't try to take steps to help clarify the  
situation. POSH advocacy is a good start. It may be a silly name but  
it's an important step in making it clear that microformats are  
narrowly defined but built on top of semantic markup -- a much wider  
pool:

http://microformats.org/wiki/posh

As the popularity of the term microformat grows, you might have to  
look
for higher ground that's easier to defend.  Because really, who  
wants to

spend their time and energy being language police?


I hope it won't come to that but you're right about the language  
police: I feel like I've spent most of today blogging, leaving  
comments and responding to emails in an attempt to set people  
straight on what does and doesn't constitute a microformat. But like  
I said, at least now that we recognise the problem, we can make a  
concerted effort to deal with it. I hope that work won't be Sisyphean.



ps. I realize that I'm a newcomer to this community, so I hope I'm not
offending anyone.  Hopefully my comments are valuable as an outsider's
first impression.


As an newcomer, your comments are probably the most valuable and  
relevant on this issue. Much appreciated.


Bye,

Jeremy

--
Jeremy Keith

a d a c t i o

http://adactio.com/


___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] Authority (was: Text::Microformat - a uf parser for Perl)

[Keith Grennan]

On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 07:40:01PM -0500, Scott Reynen wrote:
> On Apr 26, 2007, at 5:54 PM, Dr. Ernie Prabhakar wrote:
> 
> >I realize you may not like that distinction, and we may or may not  
> >have any ability to enforce that, but I think it is only reasonable  
> >for us to attempt to enforce community standards, if only through  
> >peer pressure.
> 
> I agree.  I really hope "microformat" won't turn into just another  
> term for "semantic HTML."  Clear communication is difficult enough  
> already without additional ambiguity.

I think it already has.

It's like Adobe trying to control how people use the word 'photoshop'.

You end up with single interest group that keeps repeating "That thing
your refer to is not actually FooBar - these are the real FooBars over
here".  But no one else cares, because people will use language to suit
their needs.

As the popularity of the term microformat grows, you might have to look
for higher ground that's easier to defend.  Because really, who wants to
spend their time and energy being language police?

Keith

ps. I realize that I'm a newcomer to this community, so I hope I'm not
offending anyone.  Hopefully my comments are valuable as an outsider's
first impression.

> 
> Peace,
> Scott
> 
> ___
> microformats-discuss mailing list
> microformats-discuss@microformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] Authority (was: Text::Microformat - a uf parser for Perl)

[Ciaran McNulty]

On 4/26/07, Andy Mabbett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

That's a point-of view, but not a definitive fact. Who says it's not a
microformat? With what authority?


Microformats are the things that are following the process on microformats.org.

The authority presumably comes from whoever made up the term (Tantek?)

-Ciaran McNulty
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] Authority (was: Text::Microformat - a uf parser for Perl)

[Scott Reynen]

On Apr 26, 2007, at 5:54 PM, Dr. Ernie Prabhakar wrote:

I realize you may not like that distinction, and we may or may not  
have any ability to enforce that, but I think it is only reasonable  
for us to attempt to enforce community standards, if only through  
peer pressure.


I agree.  I really hope "microformat" won't turn into just another  
term for "semantic HTML."  Clear communication is difficult enough  
already without additional ambiguity.


Peace,
Scott

___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

Re: [uf-discuss] Authority (was: Text::Microformat - a uf parser for Perl)

[Dr. Ernie Prabhakar]

Hi Andy,

On Apr 26, 2007, at 3:35 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote:
That's a point-of view, but not a definitive fact. Who says it's  
not a microformat? With what authority?


Um, is there any authority you *would* accept for that usage?

The "common usage" on this list is that "microformats" is best  
applied that markup which follows the microformat process:



http://microformats.org/wiki/process


and that other forms of semantic markup should be referred to as  
"semantic HTML" or POSH.


I realize you may not like that distinction, and we may or may not  
have any ability to enforce that, but I think it is only reasonable  
for us to attempt to enforce community standards, if only through  
peer pressure.



What happens if Microsoft or Mozilla (or both together) announce that
the next version of their browser(s) will support "microformat X",  
with

a specification for marking up, say, play-lists (or whatever), what
makes you think they and their users would pay any heed to  
protestations here?


In my experience, many people in organizations like Mozilla actually  
care a great deal about community precedent -- and the wishes of the  
original authors of a term -- whether or not it is enforced in formal  
governance structures.


I like to think of it as "common courtesy", though I suppose on the  
Internet that's an oxymoron. :-P


- Ernie P.



___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

[uf-discuss] Authority (was: Text::Microformat - a uf parser for Perl)

[Andy Mabbett]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jeremy
Keith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes

>Keith Grennan wrote:
>> Supported formats:

>>   * hGrant
>
>hGrant is not a microformat. hGrant *is* reusable semantic markup
>(POSH by another name).

That's a point-of view, but not a definitive fact. Who says it's not a
microformat? With what authority?

>On this page:
>http://hgrants.org/index.php?title=Tutorial
>you refer to hGrant as a microformat. This is incorrect. Please read
>the wiki page that describes the microformats process:
>
>http://microformats.org/wiki/process
>
>If, after reading this, it still isn't clear to you why you can't
>simply label hGrant a microformat, please let me know so that we can
>work towards making the description of the process more understandable.

What happens if Microsoft or Mozilla (or both together) announce that
the next version of their browser(s) will support "microformat X", with
a specification for marking up, say, play-lists (or whatever), what
makes you think they and their users would pay any heed to protestations
here?

Indeed, why should they, especially while issues around governance and
licensing raised by this "community" remain largely unaddressed, and
requests for evidence to support proposed formats are met, at some
effort, and then ignored by the requester?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
*  Say "NO!" to compulsory ID Cards:  
*  Free Our Data:  
*  Are you using Microformats, yet:  ?
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss