[Geowanking] geo microformat BOF session at Where 2.0

Chris Goad cg at mapbureau.com
Tue Jul 5 15:08:24 PDT 2005


A quick (and no doubt obvious) note about microformats: to my thinking, they
fill a very specific niche: lightweight tagging of xhtml content with data
not intended for human consumption. I don't regard microformats as any kind
of alternative to the various web data formats; certainly not RDF. More
generally, microformats aren't required in architectures where presentation
is generated from semantically coherent representations of underlying
content; of course I'd advocate RDF for the representation.

Practically speaking, though, there is  a vast world of content that flows
around as XHTML only; we geowankers will benefit greatly from any widely
adopted method of geotagging this content. You might mention GRDDL,  but it
may be that GRDDL's slightly higher complexity and more abstract formulation
will be an obstacle to adoption. We'll see.

-- Chris

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Schuyler Erle" <schuyler at nocat.net>
To: <geowanking at lists.burri.to>
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 12:43 PM
Subject: Re: [Geowanking] geo microformat BOF session at Where 2.0

> * On  5-Jul-2005 at  3:23AM PDT, Edward Mac Gillavry said:
> > Last thursday I joined a BOF session at Where 2.0 on the geo microformat
> > hosted by people from Technorati. They're mainly interested in
> > blogs. As there have been various discussions about this topic on the
> > geowanking list, I hope some of us can contribute to the geo microformat
> > initiative so we can focus the efforts in achieving something that works
> > for all of us. I have already pointed them to our previous discussions,
> Man, I just want to say for the record that microformats look to me
> like a big mistake waiting to happen. Everyone probably thinks that
> RSS is the shiznit on toast, but I gotta say, anyone who's had to
> write an RSS aggregator and deal with the 8 or 9 different flavors of
> RSS out there will tell you that "microformats" are a big mistake
> waiting to happen. Application-specific XML (micro)formats are, like,
> *so* 2001.
> Come on, kids, it's the 21st Century already, RDF isn't rocket
> science, it already offers bottom-up style pluggable ontologies (i.e.
> namespaces) and you'll be glad you went there when you need to add new
> semantics to your application without having to *touch* a
> (micro)format parser ever again.  Gee whiz.
> _______________________________________________
> Geowanking mailing list
> Geowanking at lists.burri.to
> http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking

More information about the Geowanking mailing list