Re: professional relations (was: XFN usage stats and Re:[uf-discuss]rel=muse implies romantic relationship?)
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. ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
RE: professional relations (was: XFN usage stats and Re:[uf-discuss]rel=muse implies romantic relationship?)
Siegfried Gipp wrote: You don't need the custom: prefix. Anyone can define his/her own relationships. BTW, there are more relationships than between persons. Think of rel=prev, rel=next, rel=contents, ... So if you need your own relations for whatever, simply use them. It's just it is no microformat. 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. -- -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: professional relations (was: XFN usage stats and Re: [uf-discuss]rel=muse implies romantic relationship?)
Am Mittwoch, 13. Dezember 2006 22:22 schrieb Mike Schinkel: As an aside, at the risk of starting a firestorm, it would be nice if there were a way to let the user decide his one relationship, i.e. maybe a rel=custom: href=...John Smith/a Where is of course the person's one identifier. Basically this would allow people to create a folksonomy. It could even require one of the other predefined tags to ensure that aggregators can still get a rough idea. You don't need the custom: prefix. Anyone can define his/her own relationships. BTW, there are more relationships than between persons. Think of rel=prev, rel=next, rel=contents, ... So if you need your own relations for whatever, simply use them. It's just it is no microformat. regards Siegfried ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: professional relations (was: XFN usage stats and Re: [uf-discuss] rel=muse implies romantic relationship?)
On 12/12/06, Angus McIntyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, December 12, 2006 5:05 pm, Andy Mabbett wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mike Schinkel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes OTOH, I could use any of the following if attached to professional: Respect, admire, impressed by,awed, revere, worship, idolize, iconize. If would be nice if there was a way to extend professional respect and admiration. Not to mention: mentor, mentee, trainer, trainee, I wonder if idolizing someone is in some way analogous to a VoteLinks vote-for. If we start encoding not only hierarchical relations but expressions of approval/disapproval, you have the possibility to write some extremely career-limiting XFN expressions. a href=... rel=colleague boss despise ... /a and a href=... rel=colleague subordinate sweetheart ... /a are two that might not do you any good in the workplace ... Angus I agree. It's an amusing situation, but possibly a bit personal! Adding additional attribute values seems a bit like splitting hairs to me. What exists at the moment is a generalised, but for the most part adequate list of types that describe in a loose terms (so as not to be restrictive) just about any relationship a person is likely to have. There are probably merits to adding a couple more, but I'm not sure adding every single explicit type of relationship has any extra value. Infact, adding too many additional terms starts to water down the effect and would no doubt make creating useful maps of information from these relationships difficult. F -- Frances Berriman http://fberriman.com ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: professional relations (was: XFN usage stats and Re: [uf-discuss] rel=muse implies romantic relationship?)
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ciaran McNulty [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes On 12/12/06, Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not to mention: mentor, mentee, trainer, trainee, I would suspect that mentor, trainer would suffice, with then @rev=mentor and @rev=trainer providing the reciprocal relationships. I thought rev was in the process of being deprecated? -- 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
Re: professional relations (was: XFN usage stats and Re: [uf-discuss] rel=muse implies romantic relationship?)
On 13 Dec 2006, at 18:29, Andy Mabbett wrote: I thought rev was in the process of being deprecated? I do hope not; I'm quite a fan of the little blighter. Do you have a URL for that? ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: professional relations (was: XFN usage stats and Re: [uf-discuss] rel=muse implies romantic relationship?)
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ben Ward [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes On 13 Dec 2006, at 18:29, Andy Mabbett wrote: I thought rev was in the process of being deprecated? I do hope not; I'm quite a fan of the little blighter. Do you have a URL for that? No, but it was recently discussed here, IIRC. -- 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
Re: professional relations (was: XFN usage stats and Re: [uf-discuss] rel=muse implies romantic relationship?)
Search the list -- Tantek has made related statements. I too like the idea of the rev attribute, but it's potentially a crap shoot as there's so little behavior for it to be semi-worthless. The idea of XBN is one we've explored previously as well (x-business-network). Again, try searching. Lastly, as Tantek pointed out, we should consider how these links would help exchange data between two or more parties. As LinkedIn and XING now support microformats, there a strong case for figuring out how to export your professional relationships, using terms that they both support (hint: start your research there!). While 'colleague' and 'co-worker' are a good start, they don't capture 'former-employer', 'client', 'consultant' or much else. The goal is not to describe all relationship variations, but common ones that are shared between professional networking/resume sites. Chris On 12/13/06, Ben Ward [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 13 Dec 2006, at 18:29, Andy Mabbett wrote: I thought rev was in the process of being deprecated? I do hope not; I'm quite a fan of the little blighter. Do you have a URL for that? ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss -- Chris Messina Citizen Provocateur Open Source Ambassador-at-Large Work: http://citizenagency.com Blog: http://factoryjoe.com/blog Cell: 412 225-1051 Skype: factoryjoe This email is: [ ] bloggable[X] ask first [ ] private ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
XFN: Proposing rel='respect' (was RE: professional relations and XFN usage stats and Re: [uf-discuss]rel=muse implies romantic relationship?)
I always find it interesting how on a mailing list someone can make a simple comment with a pretty small scope and then have the community run with it, misinterpretting the original comment or suggestion, expanding its scope, and then debating and often even criticizing the assuming original intent! I've had this happen twice regarding comments I've made in so many days. So please let me clarify that when I said: OTOH, I could use any of the following if attached to professional: Respect, admire, impressed by,awed, revere, worship, idolize, iconize. If would be nice if there was a way to extend professional respect and admiration. I was simply saying that I felt there was a strong need for ONE additional value to be used in the professional relationship category. When I blog I frequently refer to people to whom I would like to include some form of professional respect and admiration, but none of the words I thought of were quite right. This has the effect of my just having no motivation to use XFN. So in order to start the discussion about which ONE term to add, I listed all the ones of similar meaning I could think of in hopes to have people say I think '' would be best. And at the risk of rehashing, I'll try to state clearly why I don't think the current list is sufficient. While the people who defined XFN 1.1 intended muse to be used for what I find missing, I am completely uncomfortable denoting someone as my muse unless a.) they are of the opposite sex, b.) she is a celebrity of sorts, c.) and I don't know her personally. As the web is mostly a social phenomenon I would contend that although the use of muse makes perfect dictionary sense, the common use muse, especially when paired with romantic has implications I personally would not want anyone to infer if I linked to Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, or Linus Torvalds. Call me uptight, but I'm sure I'm not the only one. That said, I would like to propose that we add to XFN respect in the professional category, or some other similar term which the community decides is more appropriate, and increment the version to 1.2. -- -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: professional relations (was: XFN usage stats and Re: [uf-discuss]rel=muse implies romantic relationship?)
As an aside, at the risk of starting a firestorm, it would be nice if there were a way to let the user decide his one relationship, i.e. maybe a rel=custom: href=...John Smith/a Where is of course the person's one identifier. Basically this would allow people to create a folksonomy. It could even require one of the other predefined tags to ensure that aggregators can still get a rough idea. -Mike ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: XFN: Proposing rel='respect' (was RE: professional relations and XFN usage stats and Re: [uf-discuss]rel=muse implies romantic relationship?)
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mike Schinkel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I would like to propose that we add to XFN respect in the professional category, or some other similar term which the community decides is more appropriate, and increment the version to 1.2. I'm curious in the absence of rev, what would be the reverse relationship of respect? -- 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
Re: XFN: Proposing rel='respect' (was RE: professional relations and XFN usage stats and Re: [uf-discuss]rel=muse implies romantic relationship?)
Andy Mabbett wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mike Schinkel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I would like to propose that we add to XFN respect in the professional category, or some other similar term which the community decides is more appropriate, and increment the version to 1.2. I'm curious in the absence of rev, what would be the reverse relationship of respect? rel=diss ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: XFN: Proposing rel='respect' (was RE: professional relations and XFN usage stats and Re: [uf-discuss]rel=muse implies romantic relationship?)
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Rob O'Rourke [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I'm curious in the absence of rev, what would be the reverse relationship of respect? rel=diss Ah, but that's the opposite, not the reverse. -- 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
Re: XFN: Proposing rel='respect' (was RE: professional relations and XFN usage stats and Re: [uf-discuss]rel=muse implies romantic relationship?)
Aren't claims that you are respected by ___ kind of arrogant? Is a reverse useful? It's one thing for someone to claim they respect another, and another thing entirely to claim to be respected. On 12/13/06, Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Rob O'Rourke [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I'm curious in the absence of rev, what would be the reverse relationship of respect? rel=diss Ah, but that's the opposite, not the reverse. -- 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 ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: professional relations (was: XFN usage stats and Re: [uf-discuss] rel=muse implies romantic relationship?)
On Dec 13, 2006, at 10:39 AM, Ben Ward wrote: On 13 Dec 2006, at 18:29, Andy Mabbett wrote: I thought rev was in the process of being deprecated? I do hope not; I'm quite a fan of the little blighter. Do you have a URL for that? Currently it's not in HTML5. To be conservative, I don't think we should build on any features that won't be in HTML5 (not that we can't change the course of the WHAT-WG). -ryan -- Ryan King [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: XFN: Proposing rel='respect' (was RE: professional relations and XFN usage stats and Re: [uf-discuss]rel=muse implies romantic relationship?)
Andy Mabbett wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Rob O'Rourke [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I'm curious in the absence of rev, what would be the reverse relationship of respect? rel=diss Ah, but that's the opposite, not the reverse. Thats just my misunderstanding, sorry for the list noise I just couldn't resist :-P At least that's something new in my html knowledge, ta. Rob ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
