RE: the term microformat and encouraging people to play (wasRe:[uf-discuss] Comments from IBM/Lotus rep about Microformats)

[Mike Schinkel]

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On 
S. Sriram wrote
 What you have is a 'classic branding problem' ...

Excellent analysis.  Al Ries is my hero. :)

-- 
-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: the term microformat and encouraging people to play (wasRe:[uf-discuss] Comments from IBM/Lotus rep about Microformats)

[S. Sriram]

From: Tantek Ç elik [EMAIL PROTECTED]


The term nor site microformats(.org) did not bring about a new category.

The category pre-existed: semantic (X)HTML.

microformats is the specific brand (your term) of semantic (X)HTML 
that

follows the microformats principles and process.

You could say that RDFa is another brand of semantic (X)HTML that 
follows

its own principles.



Unfortunately, the use of a 'generic' term such as microformats turns it
into a 'category', because categories are created by (all the others out
there) others and inspired by products.

Rather than us extending this debate, I might suggest that you file this
away as the reason for the confusion. Solutions are entirely upto you
and if you need further reading, besides al ries I might suggest you
could also see seth godin's comments on podcasting  rss
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2006/06/being_brave_wit.html

S. Sriram 


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