Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations and other property-names for "species"

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Charles Roper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >On 23/10/06, Andy Mabbett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >I've yet to >> >see an example that uses the term binomial as a class name in markup. >> >> I've always used "sci", for binominal ands sub-species' names. There has >>

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations and other property-names for "species"

On 23/10/06, Andy Mabbett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I've yet to >see an example that uses the term binomial as a class name in markup. I've always used "sci", for binominal ands sub-species' names. There has been some comment here, which I've happily accepted, that that wouldn't be a good prop

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations and other property-names for "species"

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Charles Roper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >I've yet to >see an example that uses the term binomial as a class name in markup. I've always used "sci", for binominal ands sub-species' names. There has been some comment here, which I've happily accepted, that that woul

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations and other property-names for "species"

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Charles Roper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >On 22/10/06, Andy Mabbett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I'm ambivalent; but another taxonomist advised me, in e-mail, to avoid >> "binomial", as that is also used in mathematics. That seemed sensible to >> me. > >I'm going t

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ryan King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >On Oct 20, 2006, at 2:17 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: >> My full question was: >> >> Why is packet size relevant? The page concerned has many - >>and some have dozens - of table rows in similar format. > >Maybe I don't unders

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations and other property-names for "species"

I work with experts in this field and so it's a simple task for me to ask around. Neat. Going back to learning how the market place is doing it, I've yet to see an example that uses the term binomial as a class name in markup. If I find an example, I'll post it. Great, that's exactly what I

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose)

On Oct 21, 2006, at 9:58 AM, Charles Roper wrote: Can anyone give any real *disadvantages* to using output compression? If you do it right, none. Some browsers, like IE 5 and maybe 6, have problems with compressed, cached JavaScript and other weird edge cases. However, most HTTP servers com

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations and other property-names for "species"

On 23/10/06, Benjamin West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm going to poll a few experts on this. I'll let you know when I get > some feedback. It's probably more important to poll already published content, to learn how the market place is already doing it. This is the whole point of documentin

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations)

On Oct 21, 2006, at 9:37 AM, Charles Roper wrote: On 21/10/06, Andy Mabbett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I don't think the intention is that the raw markup of a uF be "human-readable first". This is a good point; what, exactly, should be "human readable first?" I always assumed it was the rend

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

On Oct 20, 2006, at 2:17 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: My full question was: Why is packet size relevant? The page concerned has many - and some have dozens - of table rows in similar format. Maybe I don't understand your question, then. Are you asking "why is packet size important with

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations and other property-names for "species"

I'm going to poll a few experts on this. I'll let you know when I get some feedback. It's probably more important to poll already published content, to learn how the market place is already doing it. This is the whole point of documenting examples, analyzing publishing behaviour, and only after

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations and other property-names for "species"

On 22/10/06, Andy Mabbett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'm ambivalent; but another taxonomist advised me, in e-mail, to avoid "binomial", as that is also used in mathematics. That seemed sensible to me. I'm going to poll a few experts on this. I'll let you know when I get some feedback. >>

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations and other property-names for "species"

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Charles Roper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >> bin (binominal) > >Binominal or binomial? A discussion on the subject here: >http://tinyurl.com/tptsh I'm ambivalent; but another taxonomist advised me, in e-mail, to avoid "binomial", as that is also used in

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations and other property-names for "species"

On 22/10/06, Andy Mabbett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: bin (binominal) Binominal or binomial? A discussion on the subject here: http://tinyurl.com/tptsh cname (common name; "common" used, instead) "Common" seems like a very common term. How about "vernacular" instead?

[uf-discuss] Size considerations and other property-names for "species"

I've updated the "straw-man" proposal for "species" [1], to reflect the consensus not to use these abbreviations: sci var (variety) bin (binominal) cult(cultivar) cname (common name; "common" used, instead) but what about these: subs

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose)

On 10/21/06, Charles Roper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Can anyone give any real *disadvantages* to using output compression? The choice to use compression is one of bandwidth vs. processing time. I have personally had a bad experience with a cut-rate ISP who had some sort of CPU-usage throttling

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations)

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Benjamin West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >>From : >"geo is a 1:1 representation of the "geo" property in the vCard >standard (RFC2426 (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2426.txt)) in XHTML" > >As you can see, the authors of the spec weren'

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations)

I think this has been mentioned before, but I'll mention it again. From : "geo is a 1:1 representation of the "geo" property in the vCard standard (RFC2426 (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2426.txt)) in XHTML" As you can see, the authors of the spec weren't the one

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations)

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Charles Roper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >> >I think comparing geo and sci, etc. is not a great example as I think >> >geo can be thought of as a well known abbreviation. >> >> Yes, it clearly identifies rocks, to geologists ;-) >> >> But seriously, do you really th

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose)

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Charles Roper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >Can anyone give any real *disadvantages* to using output compression? Perhaps not - but is it always available to people? Not everyone manages (or has access to the management of) the servers on which their content resides.

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose)

On 21/10/06, Kevin Marks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On the broader point, assuming you use gzip when you care about size, abbreviations don't save much, especially in the many-repeated case discussed. This is one of my primary arguments against using abbreviations. See my original post: http:/

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations)

On 21/10/06, Andy Mabbett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> And yet we have "geo". > >I think comparing geo and sci, etc. is not a great example as I think >geo can be thought of as a well known abbreviation. Yes, it clearly identifies rocks, to geologists ;-) But seriously, do you really think it'

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations)

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Christopher Rines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >> And yet we have "geo". > >I think comparing geo and sci, etc. is not a great example as I think >geo can be thought of as a well known abbreviation. Yes, it clearly identifies rocks, to geologists ;-) But seriously,

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose)

On Oct 19, 2006, at 9:57 PM, Christopher Rines wrote: In my opinion amount is a really difficult one to abbreviate (or any measure for that matter) as it can be used to describe a lot of other things for which there is not yet a microformat but cur (for currency) is interesting as just off t

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ryan King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >On Oct 19, 2006, at 12:43 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: >> Why is packet size relevant? >The cost of sending and receiving data in TCP/IP is broken up into >fixed costs (ie, things that are constant for every connection or >every pa

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

On Oct 19, 2006, at 12:43 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kevin Marks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes In itself, it's not significant, as it is well under a packet size, as I said, and so will not affect download time. Why is packet size relevant? The cost of sending and

Re: RE: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations)

On 20/10/06, Brian Suda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- the tricky thing is that there are no namespaces in Microformats, so if you use cur, sure it is scopped to 'money', but it is now a 'reserved word' for all of microformats. As it was pointed out in a previous message, then what happens to 'cu

Re: RE: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations)

On 10/20/06, Mike Schinkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: However, and this is an honest question, isn't "currency" and "amount" really only valid in context with "money?" Wouldn't that make it okay to abbreviate the children of money, like so?: $ 5.99 ---

RE: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose)

Hey Mike, This is an very good/interesting example... In my opinion amount is a really difficult one to abbreviate (or any measure for that matter) as it can be used to describe a lot of other things for which there is not yet a microformat but cur (for currency) is interesting as just off the

RE: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations)

hristopher Rines Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2006 10:45 PM To: microformats-discuss@microformats.org Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations) In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Charles Roper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in addition to other things said: > Should &quo

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations (or how to choose abbreviations)

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Charles Roper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in addition to other things said: > Should "bin", var", "cult", etc., be written in full? (I think not, to > save bloating file sizes) > These abbreviations are absolutely fine within the very narrow domain of > biological nomencl

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kevin Marks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >Good! Do you have before and after versions? Sadly not - I took the opportunity to re-write and restructure the pages at the same time as I applied uFs. I could retroactively manufacture some, but the would just be a number

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

On Oct 19, 2006, at 12:43 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: In itself, it's not significant, as it is well under a packet size, as I said, and so will not affect download time. Why is packet size relevant? The page concerned has many - and some have dozens - of table rows in similar format. Good! Do

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kevin Marks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >> Other than the "20061103T213000Z" format for dates, what did you >>change? > >I removed a redundant 'title'. You removed the title from: Since it's also in the original mark-up, it also has no bearing on the incr

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

On Oct 19, 2006, at 11:58 AM, Andy Mabbett wrote: In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kevin Marks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes using more compact forms of the mf markup I get Other than the "20061103T213000Z" format for dates, what did you change? I removed a redundant 'title'. gzipped I get

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Charles Roper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >I raised the point, as you no doubt know, in response to the Species >brainstorming on the wiki [1]; specifically this: > >Should "bin", var", "cult", etc., be written in full? (I think not, to >save bloating file sizes) > >

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kevin Marks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >using more compact forms of the mf markup I get Other than the "20061103T213000Z" format for dates, what did you change? >gzipped I get 293 vs 451 ratio 1.51 So - still an increase of over 50%. That's not insignificant. -

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

On Oct 18, 2006, at 6:09 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: That's 399 characters increased to 860 (excluding indentation); over double. when gzipped (with indentation) I get 308 bytes vs 498 ration 1.62 Stripping out the indentation and CRs and using more compact forms of the mf markup I get Frida

RE: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

Okay... Did I just make more work for myself? :) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Roper Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2006 3:45 AM To: Microformats Discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations Mike Schinkel wrote: >

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

Andy Mabbett wrote: Is is considered better to have longer, easier-to-read, more descriptive, more semantically correct attribute values over shorter, more concise, bandwidth-saving ones? Its not the length, its what you do with it ;-) As in all things, it's a matter of balance. Yes, I agree

RE: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

m belaboring the point...) -Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Roper Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2006 3:41 AM To: Microformats Discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations Scott Reynen wrote: > Who is publishing 10 colu

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

Mike Schinkel wrote: Has there been any thought to try and survey the web development community at large on these types of issues? I could see the value of having a lot of these types of questions answered if we were do present surveys (of course hopefully we could find a surveying expert to hel

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

Scott Reynen wrote: Who is publishing 10 columns and 100 rows of prices or something similar? It would be helpful to look at some real-world markup so we can come up with practical ways to address this concern. If it's in rows and columns, I would assume each price to be in a , so class="mone

RE: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

ne isn't a hard-core web developer (in smaller companies.) Just another thought... -Mike -Original Message- From: Mike Schinkel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 10:08 PM To: 'Microformats Discuss' Subject: RE: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

RE: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

t: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 7:52 PM To: Microformats Discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations On Oct 18, 2006, at 6:34 PM, Mike Schinkel wrote: > The following is 6 characters: > > $54.97 > > This is 151 characters (according to MS-Word's stats dialog):

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Scott Reynen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >On Oct 18, 2006, at 7:16 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: > >> Scott Reynen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >> >>> It would be helpful to look at some real-world markup so we can come >>> up with practical ways to address this concern. >>

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

On Oct 18, 2006, at 7:16 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote: Scott Reynen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes It would be helpful to look at some real-world markup so we can come up with practical ways to address this concern. I've just posted real markup on the Wiki I should have been more clear. I'd like t

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike Schinkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >forgive me if my example is not exactly what was proposed, but it >should be equivalent in # of characters used). The following is 6 >characters: > > $54.97 > >This is 151 characters (according to MS-Word's stats dialo

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Scott Reynen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >It would be helpful to look at some real-world markup so we can come >up with practical ways to address this concern. I've just posted real markup on the Wiki, to illustrate this very issue, and had summarily removed and it

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike Schinkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >>> A. You probably won't notice any impact on page size when authoring with >microformats. > >In many cases, I agree. But Careful... -- Andy Mabbett Say "NO!" to compulsory ID Cards:

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Andy Mabbett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Andy Mabbett ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes > >>>Added to the wiki: http://microformats.org/wiki/faq#Class_semantics >>> >>>Q. How will microformat class names impact page size? >> >>I added suppl

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

On Oct 18, 2006, at 6:34 PM, Mike Schinkel wrote: The following is 6 characters: $54.97 This is 151 characters (according to MS-Word's stats dialog): $ 54.97 So let's think about a price matri

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Andy Mabbett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >>Added to the wiki: http://microformats.org/wiki/faq#Class_semantics >> >>Q. How will microformat class names impact page size? > >I added supplementary, and factual, answer, but it's been summarily and >immediately reverted

RE: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

ROTECTED] On Behalf Of Benjamin West Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 5:18 PM To: Microformats Discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations Added to the wiki: http://microformats.org/wiki/faq#Class_semantics Q. How will microformat class names impact page size? A. You probably won't

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Benjamin West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >Added to the wiki: http://microformats.org/wiki/faq#Class_semantics > >Q. How will microformat class names impact page size? I added supplementary, and factual, answer, but it's been summarily and immediately reverted by Ta

RE: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

18, 2006 2:17 PM To: Microformats Discuss Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations Scott Reynen wrote: > I agree with all of this, but I think a more fundamental issue is that > this problem is always presented as a hypothetical, and we shouldn't > spend out time trying to solv

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Scott Reynen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >> Is is considered better to have longer, easier-to-read, more >> descriptive, more semantically correct attribute values over shorter, >> more concise, bandwidth-saving ones? >>on very large pages (in terms of markup), all

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Charles Roper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >Is is considered better to have longer, easier-to-read, more >descriptive, more semantically correct attribute values over shorter, >more concise, bandwidth-saving ones? Its not the length, its what you do with it ;-) As i

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

Added to the wiki: http://microformats.org/wiki/faq#Class_semantics Q. How will microformat class names impact page size? A. You probably won't notice any impact on page size when authoring with microformats. Our experience is that people use comparably sized class names, and semantic class name

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

Scott Reynen wrote: I agree with all of this, but I think a more fundamental issue is that this problem is always presented as a hypothetical, and we shouldn't spend out time trying to solve hypothetical problems. We know readability is a problem when someone can't understand something. We'll

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

On Oct 18, 2006, at 6:49 AM, Charles Roper wrote: Is is considered better to have longer, easier-to-read, more descriptive, more semantically correct attribute values over shorter, more concise, bandwidth-saving ones? I consider semantics more important than length. This comes up enough tha

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

Should this stuff be in a FAQ or be made into a uF principle page? On 10/18/06, Charles Roper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Is is considered better to have longer, easier-to-read, more descriptive, more semantically correct attribute values over shorter, more concise, bandwidth-saving ones? On sma

Re: [uf-discuss] Size considerations

Given that mF are based on convention, I think it first depends on what people are discovered to already be doing. In fact, long ago I argued for renaming hcard to hperson or some other more widely meaningful class but was shot down owing to the formats foundation in vcard. I wasn't necessarily w

[uf-discuss] Size considerations

Is is considered better to have longer, easier-to-read, more descriptive, more semantically correct attribute values over shorter, more concise, bandwidth-saving ones? On small pages, a few extra bytes of HTML won't make a big difference, but on very large pages (in terms of markup), all those ex