Re: [uf-discuss] Regarding Profile URIs and Disambiguation (wasComments from IBM/Lotus rep about Microformats)
On 12/14/06, Mike Schinkel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just curious, what did you mean by double entendre markup? It means 'double meaning'. -Ciaran McNulty ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
RE: [uf-discuss] Regarding Profile URIs and Disambiguation(wasComments from IBM/Lotus rep about Microformats)
Ciaran McNulty write: On 12/14/06, Mike Schinkel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just curious, what did you mean by double entendre markup? It means 'double meaning'. Sigh A double entendre often refers to something with a negative meaning. I was basically asking if that's what he was implying without being defensive. -- -Mike Schinkel http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/ http://www.welldesignedurls.org/ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Regarding Profile URIs and Disambiguation(wasComments from IBM/Lotus rep about Microformats)
On 12/14/06, Mike Schinkel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sigh A double entendre often refers to something with a negative meaning. I was basically asking if that's what he was implying without being defensive. Oh, right. Sorry. I didn't read any particularly negative meaning into it, I assumed Scott was just making a bit of wordplay. -Ciaran McNulty ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] Regarding Profile URIs and Disambiguation(wasComments from IBM/Lotus rep about Microformats)
On Dec 14, 2006, at 5:56 AM, Mike Schinkel wrote: Ciaran McNulty write: On 12/14/06, Mike Schinkel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just curious, what did you mean by double entendre markup? It means 'double meaning'. Sigh A double entendre often refers to something with a negative meaning. I was basically asking if that's what he was implying without being defensive. I was just trying to give a name to the concept, shorter than one symbol, two meanings, one document and I thought double entendre would do the job nicely. I wasn't attempting to imply anything more than that here (though I did explicitly say more than that elsewhere). Peace, Scott ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
RE: [uf-discuss] Regarding Profile URIs and Disambiguation (wasComments from IBM/Lotus rep about Microformats)
Scott Reynen wrote: But I also think it's both a rare and a bad practice to use one symbol to communicate two different ideas in a single context. It may be rare in the use-cases you've seen, but in content that I expect to be publishing soon it will be the norm, not just isolated special cases. here's what you can do to solve this problem whenever you encounter it: 1) add profiles for both vcard and region-data, e.g.: 2) add prefixes to all your region-data tags when you decide to add the conflicting hCard names, e.g.: 3) designate that prefix in a meta tag, e.g.: 4) convince developers of region-data parsers to look for prefixes That works in the context of a known microformat vs. semantic markup in the wild, but does not work between two semantic markups in the wild that are unknown to each other at the time of definition. Further, it imposes a burden on the semantic markup definer and the content author of needing to prefix all markup instead of just the markup that conflicts in a given HTML document (my proposal would make it a known standard that prefixes on sub-elements are only required for disambiguation.) And lastly it only works for those who have access to the HTML element; with the proliferation of hosted blogs, wikis, and forums, people are decreasingly able to annotate the HTML element. Nonetheless, in the interest of ending this discussion... At this point it's become clear to me that the Microformat community is not interested in addressing the issue. Although I wish that were not the case and I do believe it will do harm to the web, I will nonetheless relent and respect the decision. I am noodling an alternate way to solve the problem that might be more palatable, and once I get it clarified enough to write down I will propose it to the Microformat community. Now you can go crazy with your double entendre markup Just curious, what did you mean by double entendre markup? -- -Mike Schinkel http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/ http://www.welldesignedurls.org/ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
