gmane.comp.web.microformats.general

Re: xfn relationships of influence

Tantek Celik — 2008-08-29T20:20:46

Hi James, I think you have some interesting ideas here and it would be useful to capture them in the xfn-brainstorming page. Perhaps create a new (sub)section "influences and influencers" and add some of your thoughts starting with: "The relationships I'm considering fall into two predicate groups, influence out(applied) and influence in(received)." Thanks, Tantek -----Original Message----- From: James Tindall public.gmane.org> Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 13:58:51 To: Microformats Discusspublic.gmane.org> Subject: [uf-discuss] xfn relationships of influence I've been refering to the xfn-brainstorming wiki for guidance on additional xfn ralationships. I can see from the wiki page that there's a desire to find a word to define the inverse of 'follower' but what I need is to offer users more options to choose from on both sides of the relationship - specifically in relation to the flow of influence. Are there any examples or

HTML5+RDFa discussion on WHATWG involves Microformats

Manu Sporny — 2008-08-29T18:17:01

Samuel Santos has started blogging about the HTML5 + RDFa/Microformats discussion that we've been having in WHATWG: http://www.samaxes.com/2008/08/29/the-semantic-web-and-rdfa/

xfn relationships of influence

James Tindall — 2008-08-29T12:58:51

I've been refering to the xfn-brainstorming wiki for guidance on additional xfn ralationships. I can see from the wiki page that there's a desire to find a word to define the inverse of 'follower' but what I need is to offer users more options to choose from on both sides of the relationship - specifically in relation to the flow of influence. Are there any examples or points of reference out there that I may have missed that already extend the xfn relationship options in this direction? Or should I not even be thinking about doing such a thing because xfn is not about influence? The relationships I'm considering fall into two predicate groups, influence out(applied) and influence in(received). Influence out: 'follower', 'student', 'subscriber', 'listener', 'reader', 'viewer', 'supporter' and 'collaborator'. Influence in: 'inspiration', 'favourite', 'teacher', 'mentor', 'adviser', 'influence', 'source' and 'collaborator'. I'm interested to hear any thoughts on this - whether I'm reinventing

Re: Potential for Microformats.org to work with W3Cand RDFa Task Force

Martin McEvoy — 2008-08-29T12:32:11

Hello Manu, all Manu I think you need to explain that RDFa is a way of expressing semantics in html, not just a way of expressing RDF annotations in html Manu Sporny wrote: Its interesting to point out that most people who publish Microformats, are not really expressing any semantics at all, < at >class doesn't expresses any semantics without meta data profiles and most publishers do not use them, yes some search engines can pick up hcards and calendar events but really that's about it. any other Microformats are Ignored mostly. That is a good example of how microformats could be used in RDFa everything (to me) seems to be in the right place. < at >typeof can include any root Microformat Class names < at >property is any Microformat Property name < at >rel is any microformat rel value Microformats Map pretty well in this way I think you should Manu, so the rest of the community can read your most excellent work :-) Agreed. Best Wishes Martin McEvoy

Re: hCard: Quick question about nicknames

Michael Smethurst — 2008-08-29T11:36:31

Hi Ciaran On 29/8/08 12:30, "Ciaran McNulty" public.gmane.org> wrote: Don't have the pseudonym data at that granular a level Family name, given name and additional names are given in addition so I'm fn-ing those http://www.bbc.co.uk/ This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this.

Re: hCard: Quick question about nicknames

Ciaran McNulty — 2008-08-29T11:30:27

On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 12:17 PM, Michael Smethurst public.gmane.org> wrote: Even if you use class="pseudonym" you still need to decide whether to populate N or NICKNAME. What I mean is you either say George Eliot is given-name + family-name or a nickname, regardless of any extra POSH semantics you'd care to add. The vCard RFC seems remarkably unenlightening about the semantics of the different fields: " Type special note: The nickname is the descriptive name given instead of or in addition to the one belonging to a person, place, or thing. It can also be used to specify a familiar form of a proper name specified by the FN or N types. Type example: NICKNAME:Robbie NICKNAME:Jim,Jimmie " Based on the two examples I'd lean towards markup up pseudonyms that are structurally formatted like names as names, with everything else as nickname, i.e.: George Eliot = given-name, family-name with a pseudonym wrapper El Greco = nickname However

Employment end dates in hResume - outstanding issue

Ciaran McNulty — 2008-08-29T11:24:37

As there's been some discussion about moving drafts into specification status lately, I'd like to address one of the outstanding issues in hResume. The problem that has arisen quite a few times, is that a lot of people with a resume are currently employed and don't know what to provide as the DTEND in their markup for their current job. The problem is not as apparent with educational events, as they tend to have a defined end point even if it's in the future (PhD students may argue, mind you). The solutions in the wild tend to be either: 1. Set the DTEND to the date the resume was generated. The problem with this approach is that if I save your resume and come back and look at it in a year's time, I might think your employment period ended on that date. 2. Set the DTEND to some far-future date. This could be confusing and could be taken to indicate that your contract ends at some specified date in the future. 3. Set the DTEND to the same as DTSTART. This makes the event be either instantaneous or 1 day

Re: hcard: additional additional names

Michael Smethurst — 2008-08-29T10:49:15

On 21/8/08 18:41, "Martin McEvoy" public.gmane.org> wrote: My bad. Was on internal port. Try http://bbc-hackday.dyndns.org:2840/people/16 http://www.bbc.co.uk/ This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this.

Re: hcard: born and died and flourished

Michael Smethurst — 2008-08-29T09:53:57

Hi Toby / all On 21/8/08 14:49, "Toby A Inkster" public.gmane.org> wrote: I've ended up with something similar: ca. 1660 - ca. 1732 Which can be seen here: http://bbc-hackday.dyndns.org:2840/people/45284 For flourished dates I've gone with: fl. ca. 1418 - ca. 1426 As here: http://bbc-hackday.dyndns.org:2840/people/45105 Does this seem acceptable? Again this is useful: http://www.library.yale.edu/cataloging/music/pernames.htm#dates http://www.bbc.co.uk/ This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential

Re: Potential for Microformats.org to work with W3Cand RDFa Task Force

Manu Sporny — 2008-08-29T06:30:22

I can almost guarantee that neither side is going to compromise their set of beliefs. The Microformats community is too hard headed to do so, and the RDFa community has a very long, arduous W3C process to consider when changing anything major in the RDFa specification. Let's give it a shot, give it a number of months, and see if either side feels like they're compromising on anything. I believe that approach is better than saying that it's impossible, throwing up our hands and giving up before we've even started.

Re: Potential for Microformats.org to work with W3CandRDFa Task Force

Manu Sporny — 2008-08-29T06:23:54

Even the ones that seem to state that RDFa does not operate in the realm of HTML? The reason I raise this point is that RDFa will be a W3C standard, applicable to XHTML1.1 and XHTML2 by the end of October 2008 (roughly). We're in the process of working out a HTML4+RDFa DTD and validator for HTML 4.01 as well. This will cover all current HTML family languages, so stating that RDFa is "outside" of HTML will only be accurate until the end of October 2008. After that, RDFa will be a part of all deployed HTML family languages. Nobody is suggesting that anybody compromise their principles. What I'm suggesting is that we may have figured out a way to bring a unified semantic data processing mechanism to RDFa and the Microformats community, across all current HTML family languages, without changing either community's approach to semantic data markup. If we're correct, it means a great deal of progress will have been made in both communities - all I'm asking for is that we cooperate with the W3C, are given the c

Re: Potential for Microformats.org to work with W3CandRDFa Task Force

Manu Sporny — 2008-08-29T06:06:50

I'll get a set of examples written up soon, then. No, the markup would still happen in HTML, using Microformat properties, but instead of using < at >class, we MAY (not MUST) use < at >typeof, < at >property, and < at >content (in the case of machine-readable data) to express Microformats. The key being that these attributes are specifically designed to contain semantic data. Here's a brief example showing how we could get rid of the ABBR design problem by re-using RDFa's < at >content attribute. Note that this would work in HTML 4.01, XHTML1.1 and XHTML2:

Start Wearing Purple by Gogol Bordello May 14th, 2002

Publishing would stay in HTML, where it is most effective. Nobody is suggesting that it move elsewhere - RDFa follows the same principles as Microformats in this case. As for the mapping between uF/RDF Vocabularies, I started a page to do just that back in October 2

Re: HTML5, Microformats and RDFa

André Luís — 2008-08-28T23:44:47

I had misread you there, Manu. I apologize. Thanks for clearing it up. Those 3x bullet points are a great summary. Well done. -- André On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Manu Sporny public.gmane.org> wrote:

Re: Potential for Microformats.org to work with W3CandRDFa Task Force

Scott Reynen — 2008-08-28T23:05:42

That, or we'd compromise RDFa. As the two efforts have somewhat divergent priorities, I don't see how we could combine them without compromising on one side or both. Improving translation between the two, however, seems likely to provide many of the same benefits without the drawbacks. Peace, Scott

Re: Potential for Microformats.org to work with W3CandRDFa Task Force

Tantek Celik — 2008-08-28T22:23:51

Completely agreed w all of Ben Ward's points. In addition - I would be very concerned that the microformats principles would be compromised by any such efforts as Manu suggests, and efficiency of parsing/parsers and other points listed are not worth compromising the principles. Tantek -----Original Message----- From: Ben Ward public.gmane.org> Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 14:55:04 To: Microformats Discusspublic.gmane.org> Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] Potential for Microformats.org to work with W3C and RDFa Task Force On 28 Aug 2008, at 12:24, Manu Sporny wrote: I'm not sure I completely see the benefit in this, and seeing your examples would be very helpful in getting a better idea of what you're proposing. From your bullet points, it seems to suggest taking microformat vocabularies and expressing them in RDFa, rather than HTML? It seems redundant for publishers. However, I do have a somewhat related issue that you might con

Re: Potential for Microformats.org to work with W3C andRDFa Task Force

Ben Ward — 2008-08-28T21:55:04

I'm not sure I completely see the benefit in this, and seeing your examples would be very helpful in getting a better idea of what you're proposing. From your bullet points, it seems to suggest taking microformat vocabularies and expressing them in RDFa, rather than HTML? It seems redundant for publishers. However, I do have a somewhat related issue that you might consider part of this effort. Some discussions I've had lately revealed usefulness in being able to _map_ microformats into RDF, for the purpose of combining microformats with other RDF vocabularies in a back-end somewhere (so, conversion for processing, rather than publishing. Publishing remains in HTML where it is most effective). I'm told that RDF ‘versions’ of vcard and icalendar are out of date compared to the microformats. As such, it strikes me that rather than maintaining duplicate specifications, it would instead make sense to develop a set of standard transformations so that any microformat can be transfo

Draft to Specification (was: More than three years)

Toby A Inkster — 2008-08-28T10:41:46

Yay! Finally the sort of discussion I was hoping to kick-start. I think 'adr' and 'geo' should certainly be considered candidates for promoting from drafts to specs - these have been stable for ages and don't seem to have any issues raised (at least none which don't effect hCard, or microformats in general). There have been plenty of ideas proposed for extensions to them, but the current drafts certainly address 80% of use cases. These can be deferred to a future iteration which would address 80% of the remaining 20% of use cases. (This would also address the anomaly that hCalendar, a full specification, recommends that event locations may be marked up with adr and geo, each of which are only drafts.) And hAudio and figure are probably stable enough to go on the "official drafts" list. The Microformats process is extremely helpful in the early stages of drafting a spec, taking the authors/editors through the process of researching relevant examples, looking at existing standards,

Re: HTML5, Microformats and RDFa

Manu Sporny — 2008-08-28T21:11:02

I never said the discussions "trashed" all of our hard work. I said that some of the discussions "ignore" (some) of the hard work performed by this community as well as the RDFa community. Right - which both this community and the RDFa community are opposed to: 1. We do not want semantics to be placed in separate files. 2. We do not want vocabularies to be re-defined from site to site. 3. We want semantic markup to be easy to author for regular people - CSS is /not/ easy to author. That's what I was attempting to point out with my statement. Apologies if I was not clear :)

Re: Draft to Specification (was: More than three years)

Chris Mear — 2008-08-28T08:47:46

2008/8/28 Ben Ward public.gmane.org>: Like 'release candidates' for software, you mean? Eg. 1.0-RC1 and 1.0-RC2, which are announced by the core contributors in a "hey, wider community, check this out before we close the door on it" sort of way? Or is that too strict? Chris

Re: HTML5, Microformats and RDFa

André Luís — 2008-08-28T20:01:34

Manu, the css based approach is somethin that has come up in discussions about semantics with fellow workers. I believe it does not trash all of the hard work the communities have don so far. All it does, from what i gathered, is move the semantics from html and places it in a separate file/place. The vocabulary used could be one specified by ufs. For instance: #tags a { rel: "tag"; } it all comes down to: do we want to separate semantics from our markup? thanks for the heads up on this matter. Cheers, André Luís On 8/28/08, Manu Sporny public.gmane.org> wrote:

Potential for Microformats.org to work with W3C andRDFa Task Force

Manu Sporny — 2008-08-28T19:24:25

Hi uFers, RDFa is going to become an official W3C standard in the next 2-3 months. Martin McEvoy had posted something about two weeks ago on the RDFa mailing list stating that he'd like to use RDFa to express Microformats: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Aug/0081.html At first, I dismissed it as something this community would not be interested in, and even if they were, something that the RDFa community wouldn't be interested in doing. Shame on me for assuming without checking with both communities first! Over the past week, I've been thinking about some of the stuff Mark Birbeck (who started the RDFa initiative) said several months ago and what Martin re-iterated in his e-mail two weeks ago: There should be a way to provide Microformats-like markup using RDFa. Afterall, it would solve the unified parser/markup issue that some (both inside and outside this community) have with Microformats. So, I drew together a very quick proposal before the RDFa Task Force meeting this