Re: professional relations (was: XFN usage stats andRe:[uf-discuss]rel=muse implies romantic relationship?)

2006-12-21 Thread Siegfried Gipp 
Am Donnerstag, 21. Dezember 2006 01:57 schrieb Mike Schinkel:

 Thanks for the comment, but I wasn't able to figure out what point you were
 trying to make.

 Were you saying that Microformats will develop to be a standard?  If that
 was your point, I don't debate it; I expect it. But w/o disambiguation and
 a way to scale of the process, I think it will create a mess.

Right. But some degree of mess is acceptable. Better than some system 
developed by some elite, which my be perfect for that elite but useless or 
not understood by the majority.

So then to be precise: No, microformats will never be a _standard_, there is 
no ISO norm about that. But it will become some kind of industry standard 
through relatively wide adoption, but that will always be a living thing. And 
living things always include some degree of mess (or say: some degree of 
chaos). That's acceptable.


 Or are you saying that there won't be a mess because you don't think many
 pages will use Microformats?

LOL No, contrary: There will be much mess out in the wild because most pages 
do not even use semantic markup at all :)

But that's not a problem of microformats.
___
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss

RE: professional relations (was: XFN usage stats andRe:[uf-discuss]rel=muse implies romantic relationship?)

2006-12-20 Thread Mike Schinkel 
Siegfried Gipp wrote:
 Am Samstag, 16. Dezember 2006 08:31 schrieb Mike Schinkel:
  You are making an invalid assumption which is that 
  I'm concerned about my markup. No, I'm not. I've 
  concerned about the need for a standard to be 
  created so that a body of knowledge and tools can 
  be developed around that body of knowledge, and 
  people will evangelize and a large number of people 
  will implement.
 
  But that said, it's now clear to me that the microformat 
  brand is not going to address my concern. No need to 
  discuss any more; it's a dead issue.
 
 Are you sure? In any democracy a standard is a matter of 
 adoption. And microformats do have the potential to be widely 
 adopted. Although not for the majority of pages (at least not 
 within the next ten years). But that's not a matter of 
 microformats. It is simply that the majority of pages do not 
 care for semantic markup at all, so why should they care for 
 microformats? In an old-style page, marked up 100% vo visual 
 effect, microformats is not even thought of. Nevertheless, 
 and although microformats aren't perfect, it is still worth 
 the efford.

Thanks for the comment, but I wasn't able to figure out what point you were
trying to make. 

Were you saying that Microformats will develop to be a standard?  If that
was your point, I don't debate it; I expect it. But w/o disambiguation and a
way to scale of the process, I think it will create a mess.

Or are you saying that there won't be a mess because you don't think many
pages will use Microformats?  

Again, I'm rather confused on your point.

-- 
-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