I find it's a lot easier to follow one list rather than three... but
perhaps that's just me.
On 10/14/06, Bob Jonkman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How about microformats-new , along with an open microformats-dev, and keep
microformats-
discuss for existing, established microformats.
As someone who's helped set up and determine mailing list policy, it's
MUCH easier to have as few lists as possible. I think the idea of a
newbie list is good, but everything else is really relevant to
everyone involved. When creating new mailing lists, a good question to
ask is: How many
On 10/16/06 5:27 AM, Colin Barrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As someone who's helped set up and determine mailing list policy, it's
MUCH easier to have as few lists as possible.
Colin, I tend to agree with this, and as such that's why we only started
with three lists which were varied based on
I was not sure if the discuss list was the best place to send the
spread the semantic web message (thanks Chris, for suggesting this).
So is this the best place for pure marketing messages?
Or is this frowned upon?
Best,
Alex
On 10/14/06, Bob Jonkman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How about
On Oct 16, 2006, at 12:05 PM, Tantek Çelik wrote:
I'd like to see some suggestions for the name of this new list.
Here is
what I have so far:
* microformats-new (focusing on discussing new microformats)
* microformats-research (focusing on the essential, and often
overlooked by
Scott, someone had previously proposed microformats-research. It achieves the
same goal as microformats-process and seems to be a little more clear.
-justin
**
Justin Thorp
Contractor - Library of Congress
e - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
p - 202/707-9541
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/16/06
On 10/16/06 10:44 AM, Justin Thorp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Scott, someone had previously proposed microformats-research. It achieves the
same goal as microformats-process and seems to be a little more clear.
Justin, Scott, good points and suggestions.
Just so we can keep track of the
Scott Reynen wrote:
On Oct 16, 2006, at 12:05 PM, Tantek Çelik wrote:
I'd like to see some suggestions for the name of this new list. Here is
what I have so far:
* microformats-new (focusing on discussing new microformats)
I think that one suffers from a simlar problem to the -propose
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tantek Çelik
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
What about creating a new list for *new* microformats, and keep
microformats-discuss for general discussion, helping newcomers and new
implementers alike?
Better to create two new lists, perhaps:
microformats-propose
It would be good to resolve this matter -- discuss should be probably
be retained... but I like
microformats-propose
and
microformats-applied (instead of apply)
Anyone else? Who has the authority to actually make this happen? ;)
Chris
On 10/14/06, Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In
In the spirit of simplest solution first, why not start with just *one* new
list for new microformats?
I think propose is too limiting because there is a lot more involved in
the development of new microformats than just proposals (in fact, the more
important parts are *not* the proposal).
I
How about microformats-new , along with an open microformats-dev, and keep
microformats-
discuss for existing, established microformats.
microformats-dev could mean the development of new microformats; perhaps
microformats-applications would be a better name...
--Bob.
This is what Tantek
So that's the idea for discussion. It may be naive. My motivation is to
reach to the average designer and developer folk in a way that's
accessible to them.
Thoughts?
A lot of the reasons you've raised might also apply to people who
simply want to *implement* uf rather than get into the
That's a good point -- and I think actually starting to look at what
you can *do* with microformats and providing technology
implementations, rather than just formats, would be an additional
purpose for this new list.
Something like microformats-implementors?
Chris
On 10/10/06, Ben Buchanan
On 10/10/06 4:54 PM, Ben Buchanan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So that's the idea for discussion. It may be naive. My motivation is to
reach to the average designer and developer folk in a way that's
accessible to them.
Thoughts?
A lot of the reasons you've raised might also apply to people
The -dev list has been pretty dead since June... so it might be good
to push it forward... however the distinction between -dev and
-discuss is lost on me, since -discuss is used almost exclusively by
the community for all bidness.
According to the site [1], we have:
* microformats-discuss:
Tantek Çelik wrote:
A lot of the reasons you've raised might also apply to people who
simply want to *implement* uf rather than get into the discussions
about creating them in the first place. I wonder if one list could
server that need as well as the newcomers? Just a thought.
What
Chris Messina wrote:
So what if we changed the definition of -dev to:
* microformats-dev: This is a public list for discussion of
implementating microformats. Unmoderated, open subscription.
If there were to be a new list, perhaps we call it:
* microformats-suggest: This is a public
Andy Mabbett said:
[-deletia-]
I've done some work on:
http://microformats.org/wiki/introduction
which seemed as good a place as any, to start.
[-deletia-]
Looks great! That's exactly what I imagined.
--
Chris Ball
mail - chris [at] rubal [dot] co [dot] uk
irc - blueNine: #web,
I set up this separate wiki a little while back to try to cultivate
this kind of entry-level information:
http://microformats.pbwiki.com/
I haven't had much time to maintain it (go figure) but it could be a
place to have, maybe 5-6 pages that try to give publishers some very
simply ways to make
This is an idea that was discussed on IRC a couple of days ago, and I
thought it was worth airing here.
The idea is to have an additional discussion list specifically for those
getting started with publishing microformats. It would carry a
no-question-is-too-stupid ethos, and aim to foster an
Drew McLellan said:
So that's the idea for discussion. It may be naive. My motivation is to
reach to the average designer and developer folk in a way that's
accessible to them.
I think it's a great idea, personally. As someone who is rather new to
microformats myself, I found the wiki could be
I agree. I think this is a really, really good idea.
Another thing I'd like to see (and this may exist, but I've missed
it?) is a listing of formats that have been suggested and rejected for
whatever reason. It's fairly (barely) managable at the moment since a
person can have a dig about in
Frances Berriman said:
Another thing I'd like to see (and this may exist, but I've missed
it?) is a listing of formats that have been suggested and rejected for
whatever reason. It's fairly (barely) managable at the moment since a
person can have a dig about in the mailing list for previous
On 10/6/06, Chris Ball [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frances Berriman said:
Another thing I'd like to see (and this may exist, but I've missed
it?) is a listing of formats that have been suggested and rejected for
whatever reason. It's fairly (barely) managable at the moment since a
person can
Frances Berriman said:
Yeah - definitely. It would be nice to allow an easy way for people
to get into the discussion and get a good overview of where we already
are (what's worked and what hasn't) before they even get to the
mailing list, basically. Apart from anything, the list is going
On 10/6/06, Chris Ball [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was thinking: seperate to previous suggestions/discussions sectiong, it
might be worth creating an FAQ from the IRC/mailing list so that people
can scan quickly to find help for themselves.
On the wiki? If so - that's easy enough to do.
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Chris Ball [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Maybe it's worth taking a tip from some of the 'Web 2.0'-style sites
and changing the main site to use friendly, if basic language
Agreed.
Sadly there seems to have been some resistance to this idea, previously
and a lot of
On 10/6/06, Andy Mabbett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Chris Ball [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Maybe it's worth taking a tip from some of the 'Web 2.0'-style sites
and changing the main site to use friendly, if basic language
Agreed.
Sadly there seems to have been some
29 matches
Mail list logo
