- From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 13:43:53 +0100
- To: "Ivan Herman" <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: "Paul Walsh, Segala" <paulwalsh@segala.com>, "Kingsley Idehen" <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, public-sweo-ig@w3.org
On 05/12/06, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote: > Paul, > > yes, the microformat community has gone its own way, and we are not very > successful (yet?) in getting closer to them. It is difficult to say why, > here are some of *my* feelings. It may be characteristic for *some* of > the problems we have. I'll pull your line from below up here - > Note also that things are changing. The GRDDL work may have a major > impact on this! There was impedance mismatch in communications early on, with microformats & semweb folks treading on each other's feet somewhat, mild antagonism. But folks like our own Ian Davis and Dan Connolly have since been active around microformats, and one of the leading microformats developers, Brian Suda, is on the GRDDL WG. So now the efforts are fairly complementary. The microformats initiative has been remarkably successful at getting (generally domain-specific) machine-readable data on the Web, but that leaves open the question of what you can do with it. Opportunities there for nice semweb demos, with the bonus that they are likely to encourage the microformats branch of Web 2.0 to be more open to the potential of semweb tech. Going the other way, there are quite a few good reasons for semweb folks using microformats (perhaps augmented with Ian's general-purpose Embedded RDF) in their HTML publishing. Not far away there's similar outreach potential through Atom (format and protocol) - ok, it's CMS domain-specific, but it's also perfectly good data. Lee and others are already on the case there. Cheers, Danny. -- http://dannyayers.com
Received on Wednesday, 6 December 2006 12:44:02 UTC