structured blogging and microformats


2005-10-19

Ok, I've been catching up on current developments a little.

One 'controversy' seems to be between StructedBlogging and microformats. Both seem very similar in intent. Only the implementation is very different (or is it?)

The main difference -as I see it after some thought - is one of what and whom they focus on:

Microformats.org: "Designed for humans first and machines second, microformats are a set of simple, open data formats built upon existing and widely adopted standards. Instead of throwing away what works today, microformats intend to solve simpler problems first by adapting to current behaviors and usage patterns."

While StuctredBlogging uses similar HTML (the use of the class attribute to denote meaning), it also adds a (purely) machine-readable representation to the code. This is done inline and in a very compatible way. But what quirks me is this: Why do I need to double the relevant info? It's there already! Also this approach relies on some kind of tool to help the author to edit it.

Microformats can be written in pure HTML, by a human.

Ok, the StructuredBlogging approach is likely to give better, more valid data.

Similar

<< FeedTree  |  no instruction manual >>


alles Bild, Text und Tonmaterial ist © Martin Spernau, Verwendung und Reproduktion erfordert die Zustimmung des Authors

Martin Spernau
© 1994-2017


amazon.de Wunschliste

Facebook me!
Google+

Google

powered by Traumtank