I don't want to discuss the schema.org effort in general here, although there surely is a lot to discuss about it. My question is how collaboration between Google.com and microformats.org is organized, where it's taking place, who is involved. I'm sure there is and has always been some informal exchange, since people happen to know each other, meet at confernces or other events etc, and of course that's fine with me. I was wondering though when I read the following statement in a transcript of the Schema.org BOF at SemTech 2011 <http://www.w3.org/2011/06/semtech-bof-notes.html>:
> [...]
> Kevin Marks: Microformats says have a discussion first. You did that with hRecipe, so I'm surprsed to see you didnt go through that here. That'a the difference in phsilophy
> Tantek �elik: Google (Kavi in particular!) successfully worked with the open community on both hReview-aggregate and hRecipe - openly.
> [...]
> Kevin Marks: hRecipe was a great example of how Google can do this.
> [...]
This sounds like quite some conversations, discussions and thorough work. Now I wonder: how specifically did that "great" and "successfull" work "with the open community" go? Where did it take place? Who was involved? And what exactly was worked out?
I won't hesitate to admit that I wasn't a very good editor of hRecipe since summer 2009 but I still am the editor as indicated on the hRecipe wikipage. I wasn't contacted by anyone regarding Rich Snippets, Schema.org or any other Google activity. Also I couldn't find any mention on the mailinglists or on the wiki. So, please: what's going on, what did I miss? Or how is this "open"?
Since Schema.org now promotes a recipe vocabulary that is slightly different from hRecipe and also more elaborated I would like to discuss what to do about that: maybe analyze the differences, observe uptake, then align hRecipe where appropriate etc. But before I start to work on that I'd like to understand what happened until now.
Cheers,
Thomas L�rtsch
�|� < in pursuit of the gestalt of it all />
^^^
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microforma...@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
On 6/29/2011 2:55 AM, thomas lörtsch wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I don't want to discuss the schema.org effort in general here, although there surely is a lot to discuss about it. My question is how collaboration between Google.com and microformats.org is organized, where it's taking place, who is involved. I'm sure there is and has always been some informal exchange, since people happen to know each other, meet at confernces or other events etc, and of course that's fine with me. I was wondering though when I read the following statement in a transcript of the Schema.org BOF at SemTech 2011<http://www.w3.org/2011/06/semtech-bof-notes.html>:
>
>> [...]
>> Kevin Marks: Microformats says have a discussion first. You did that with hRecipe, so I'm surprsed to see you didnt go through that here. That'a the difference in phsilophy
>> Tantek Çelik: Google (Kavi in particular!) successfully worked with the open community on both hReview-aggregate and hRecipe - openly.
>> [...]
>> Kevin Marks: hRecipe was a great example of how Google can do this.
>> [...]
>
> This sounds like quite some conversations, discussions and thorough work. Now I wonder: how specifically did that "great" and "successfull" work "with the open community" go? Where did it take place? Who was involved? And what exactly was worked out?
> I won't hesitate to admit that I wasn't a very good editor of hRecipe since summer 2009 but I still am the editor as indicated on the hRecipe wikipage. I wasn't contacted by anyone regarding Rich Snippets, Schema.org or any other Google activity. Also I couldn't find any mention on the mailinglists or on the wiki. So, please: what's going on, what did I miss? Or how is this "open"?
>
> Since Schema.org now promotes a recipe vocabulary that is slightly different from hRecipe and also more elaborated I would like to discuss what to do about that: maybe analyze the differences, observe uptake, then align hRecipe where appropriate etc. But before I start to work on that I'd like to understand what happened until now.
>
> Cheers,
> Thomas Lörtsch
>
>
>
> °|´< in pursuit of the gestalt of it all />
You still seem to be here :)
I remember the itemscope thing coming up. Consensus seemed to be that is
solved by root class names, but that was so long ago I forget. I assume
that people created wiki pages documenting this? If not, why not?
Microformats.org is a wiki first, and the mailing lists and IRC just
facilitate the wiki. IMHO, if it's not documented on the wiki, then it's
just a discussion.
Anyway :)
--
Stephen Paul Weber, @singpolyma
See <http://singpolyma.net> for how I prefer to be contacted
edition right joseph
Well, "just a discussion" wouldn't be a bad start. Or do you suggest that I open a wiki page on my question?
Thomas
�|� < in pursuit of the gestalt of it all />
^^^
If it doesn't get captured on a discoverable URL, it might as well not exist (and no, email archives are NOT discoverable).
I don't remember anyone asking for anything like itemscope in microformats.
This list or IRC (preferably) is a good place to start with questions, but if there is an answer it should be captured by the author in an FAQ either specific to a microformat *-faq page, or in general on:
http://microformats.org/wiki/faq
If there is a specific known issue to report for a specific microformat, add it to the *-issues page for that microformat.
If there is a specific known issue that applies to several microformats (eg class microformats) add it to:
http://microformats.org/wiki/issues
The goal is to *minimize* thrash / going in circles on email (a common problem in standards related communities), and instead to capture and grow our collective knowledge and understanding on the wiki.
Thanks,
Tantek
-----Original Message-----
From: thomas l�rtsch <tho...@stray.net>
Sender: microformats-d...@microformats.org
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 16:24:40
To: Microformats Discuss<microforma...@microformats.org>
Reply-To: Microformats Discuss <microforma...@microformats.org>
Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] schema.org, microformats.org, hRecipe
On Jun 29, 2011, at 5:05 PM, Stephen Paul Weber wrote:
>
> I remember the itemscope thing coming up. Consensus seemed to be that is solved by root class names, but that was so long ago I forget. I assume that people created wiki pages documenting this? If not, why not? Microformats.org is a wiki first, and the mailing lists and IRC just facilitate the wiki. IMHO, if it's not documented on the wiki, then it's just a discussion.
Well, "just a discussion" wouldn't be a bad start. Or do you suggest that I open a wiki page on my question?
Thomas
�|� < in pursuit of the gestalt of it all />
If something was "brought up on a regular basis by newcomers", provide the URLs, otherwise we are right to dismiss your assertion.
No one was "driven out". We've had to ban a few trolls for negative behaviors for fixed periods of time, but haven't had to do any such thing for over a year (maybe 2) now.
If you had "actual parsing uses-cases for such a feature as well as publishing use-cases", at what URL did you document them?
If you consider requiring documentation on the web/wiki and being rigorous as "elitism of uf.org" then, yes, you're not going to be very productive.
And you're right, developing microformats is not for everyone - only those that are willing to document their work and be scientific in their methods. If you consider "science" to be a cabal, then you're not going to find much sympathy and should take your name-calling elsewhere.
Document your work on discoverable URLs (preferably on the wiki) or don't bother complaining.
Tantek
-----Original Message-----
From: Derrick Pallas <der...@pallas.us>
Sender: microformats-d...@microformats.org
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 07:33:52
To: Microformats Discuss<microforma...@microformats.org>
Reply-To: Microformats Discuss <microforma...@microformats.org>
Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] schema.org, microformats.org, hRecipe
since you already contributed to this thread, would you care to comment on my original question? Or can you point me to a wiki page where it is answered already? Besides browsing through the microformats.org site I also fulltext-searched it for "Google" but couldn't find anything relevant wrt my initial question (see the first mail in this thread). Which is odd.
Cheers
Thomas
PS: And can you elaborate (or point me to a wiki page) how email archives on the web are "NOT" discoverable?
On Jun 30, 2011, at 8:51 PM, Tantek �elik wrote:
> The point is to capture specific issues rather than have a "discussion" - a discussion where nothing is recorded on the wiki is nearly worthless and may as well have not happened.
>
> If it doesn't get captured on a discoverable URL, it might as well not exist (and no, email archives are NOT discoverable).
>
>
> I don't remember anyone asking for anything like itemscope in microformats.
>
>
> This list or IRC (preferably) is a good place to start with questions, but if there is an answer it should be captured by the author in an FAQ either specific to a microformat *-faq page, or in general on:
>
> http://microformats.org/wiki/faq
>
>
> If there is a specific known issue to report for a specific microformat, add it to the *-issues page for that microformat.
>
>
> If there is a specific known issue that applies to several microformats (eg class microformats) add it to:
>
> http://microformats.org/wiki/issues
>
>
> The goal is to *minimize* thrash / going in circles on email (a common problem in standards related communities), and instead to capture and grow our collective knowledge and understanding on the wiki.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tantek
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: thomas l�rtsch <tho...@stray.net>
> Sender: microformats-d...@microformats.org
> Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 16:24:40
> To: Microformats Discuss<microforma...@microformats.org>
> Reply-To: Microformats Discuss <microforma...@microformats.org>
> Subject: Re: [uf-discuss] schema.org, microformats.org, hRecipe
>
>
> On Jun 29, 2011, at 5:05 PM, Stephen Paul Weber wrote:
>>
>> I remember the itemscope thing coming up. Consensus seemed to be that is solved by root class names, but that was so long ago I forget. I assume that people created wiki pages documenting this? If not, why not? Microformats.org is a wiki first, and the mailing lists and IRC just facilitate the wiki. IMHO, if it's not documented on the wiki, then it's just a discussion.
>
> Well, "just a discussion" wouldn't be a bad start. Or do you suggest that I open a wiki page on my question?
>
> Thomas
>
>
>
>
> �|� < in pursuit of the gestalt of it all />
> ^^^
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> microformats-discuss mailing list
> microforma...@microformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> microformats-discuss mailing list
> microforma...@microformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
�|� < in pursuit of the gestalt of it all />
Ok will do.
> Besides browsing through the microformats.org site I also fulltext-searched it for "Google" but couldn't find anything relevant wrt my initial question (see the first mail in this thread). Which is odd.
Indeed.
> PS: And can you elaborate (or point me to a wiki page) how email archives on the web are "NOT" discoverable?
See above where you wrote:
"fulltext-searched it for "Google" but couldn't find anything relevant
wrt my initial question (see the first mail in this thread). Which is
odd."
Your statement demonstrates my point about how email archives on the
web are "NOT" discoverable.
Now, as to your specific questions:
2011/6/29 thomas lörtsch <tho...@stray.net>:
> Hi all,
>
> I don't want to discuss the schema.org effort in general here, although there surely is a lot to discuss about it.
I've got about a half-dozen or so blog posts in progress strongly
critiquing and debunking schema.org as an effort - there are so many
things wrong with it that it's taking me a while to collect / itemize
them all. I'm also trying to focus my longer analyses on what to do
right rather than what schema.org has done wrong. E.g.:
http://tantek.com/2011/168/b1/practices-good-open-web-standards-development
If you want to discuss/critique schema.org in particular, check out:
irc://irc.freenode.net/schema where the minutes for the SemTech meetup
were taken.
> My question is how collaboration between Google.com and microformats.org is organized, where it's taking place,
In short: on the wiki, irc channel, and a little on the *-discuss and
*-new mailing lists, like with anybody else.
> who is involved.
The SemTech transcript mentioned both hReview-aggregate and hRecipe as
you quoted.
If you google for both of those:
hReview-aggregate - first result:
http://microformats.org/wiki/hreview-aggregate
which says right at the top:
"Editor
Kavi Goel, Google."
and:
"Authors/Contributers (alphabetical)
...
Othar Hansson, Google "
hRecipe - first result:
http://microformats.org/wiki/hrecipe
Searching that page for "Google" you quickly find:
Google. Launched 24th February, 2011, Recipe View search results from
Google are powered by hRecipe marked-up snippets.
where Recipe View links to:
http://www.google.com/landing/recipes/
which doesn't say who specifically is involved.
Googling for:
hrecipe google
3rd result is:
http://microformats.org/2011/02/24/google-launches-microformat-powered-recipe-search
wherein the 2nd link is:
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/02/slice-and-dice-your-recipe-search.html
which if you read to the end of the post is:
"Posted by Kavi Goel, Product Manager"
> I'm sure there is and has always been some informal exchange,
Actually I personally try to minimize informal person-to-person
exchanges regarding microformats as they doesn't scale well for the
community.
Kavi has contacted me personally in the past and I've done my best to
direct him to ask his questions etc. on the IRC channel and document
his research / requirements / brainstorms publicly on the wiki,
emphasizing that it's ok to have incomplete/partial work on the wiki
while figuring things out.
> since people happen to know each other, meet at confernces or other events etc,
Those are all true of course. However even in those cases, it's best
to have those discussion in open areas such as the IRC channel or the
wiki for everyone's benefit.
> and of course that's fine with me.
That's generous of you, however I do think it is reasonable to request
that folks in the microformats community prefer community forums (IRC,
wiki, mailing list if necessary) to private one-on-one or small group
interactions (with perhaps the one exception of just wanting to bounce
crazy/uncertain/raw ideas off of friends to sanity-check them before
sharing more widely/publicly).
> I was wondering though when I read the following statement in a transcript of the Schema.org BOF at SemTech 2011 <http://www.w3.org/2011/06/semtech-bof-notes.html>:
>
>> [...]
>> Kevin Marks: Microformats says have a discussion first. You did that with hRecipe, so I'm surprsed to see you didnt go through that here. That'a the difference in phsilophy
>> Tantek Çelik: Google (Kavi in particular!) successfully worked with the open community on both hReview-aggregate and hRecipe - openly.
>> [...]
>> Kevin Marks: hRecipe was a great example of how Google can do this.
>> [...]
>
>
> This sounds like quite some conversations, discussions and thorough work. Now I wonder: how specifically did that "great" and "successfull" work "with the open community" go? Where did it take place?
On the wiki (as documented above) and mailing lists.
A simple microformats.org site-specific search of Kavi Goel gives you plenty:
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Amicroformats.org+%22Kavi+Goel%22
> Who was involved?
See above. From trivial googling of hReview-aggregate, Kavi and Othar.
> And what exactly was worked out?
What you see on the wiki.
> I won't hesitate to admit that I wasn't a very good editor of hRecipe since summer 2009 but I still am the editor as indicated on the hRecipe wikipage.
You did fine. Certainly sufficiently well that no one else wanted to
step up and take your place as editor. You stepped up and did a lot of
work, and positively contributed to the microformats community, which
I personally am quite thankful for, and I'm sure others are too.
> I wasn't contacted by anyone regarding Rich Snippets, Schema.org or any other Google activity.
If an open community is working well, then there should be no need for
any person-to-person specific contacts.
> Also I couldn't find any mention on the mailinglists or on the wiki. So, please: what's going on, what did I miss? Or how is this "open"?
You couldn't find mentions of what? hRecipe? hReview-aggregate? rich snippets?
All of these are trivially discoverable via a site-specific search:
> Since Schema.org now promotes a recipe vocabulary that is slightly different from hRecipe and also more elaborated I would like to discuss what to do about that: maybe analyze the differences, observe uptake, then align hRecipe where appropriate etc.
There are a couple of things you can do with Schema.org's slightly
different recipe format, or any other recipe format:
1. Add them to recipe-formats
http://microformats.org/wiki/recipe-formats
2. Add specific new features (that hRecipe doesn't have yet) to the
brainstorming page:
http://microformats.org/wiki/recipe-brainstorming
> But before I start to work on that I'd like to understand what happened until now.
Excellent instinct and I commend you for it. That's the same reason
the process requires documenting examples in the wild of content
publishing, as well as previous/other efforts at formats.
http://microformats.org/wiki/process#Document_Current_Behavior
Thanks,
Tantek
--
http://tantek.com/ - I made an HTML5 tutorial! http://tantek.com/html5
I remember coming across an issue with the hreview on Yahoo! Tech around
2006. It wasn't specifically itemscope, rather the desire to reference
content from another section of the page. For example, we had various
hreviews on a product page, but we had trouble referencing the product name
without including it within each review's container.
Itemscope wasn't an option at that time and I don't think it would have
solved the issue. We tried to reference the product name but ended up adding
the product name to each review via a hidden element. It was an ugly
solution, but better than having thousands of reviews for anonymous
products.
That being said, I do believe people would have used itemscope if it was
available from the beginning of microformats. But hindsight is 20/20.
Ted
>> �ソス|�ソス < in pursuit of the gestalt of it all />
>> ^^^
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> microformats-discuss mailing list
>> microforma...@microformats.org
>> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> microformats-discuss mailing list
>> microforma...@microformats.org
>> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
>
>
>
>
>
>
> �ソス|�ソス < in pursuit of the gestalt of it all />