blogs

"Web 2.0 doesn't exist" post kicks up a ruckus by ZDNet's Russell Shaw -- Man, did I raise a storm of controversy with my Web 2.0? It doesn't exist post[...]

Richard MacManus had similar sentiments as well.

Google base announced today to a way to submit structured content. I hope this creates more interest in content creators to consider structuring their content using microformating principles.

Bud said:

Somewhat to the contrary, I see microformats as an opportunity for invention... ...The much harder issue in microformats is the politics of getting them accepted by an expert group. A smart strategy for innovators at this point might be to focus on areas that are not already the focus of an expert group. Instead of getting involved in a standards war, find a new frontier, drive adoption by people with needs, and declare yourself the winner.

The Community Engine Blog

I think the desire for microformatting is to transcend the inability of computers to understand the meaning of a chunk of content.

What we plan to achieve here at microformat.org is creating a set of standards developed in a social manner. A community of individuals building and refining formats as needed, while at the same time allowing users to pick and choose which microformat works best for them.

For example, all reviews microformats will have some core base that is hashed out by the community maintaining and using the reviews formats. With such a base, we (programmers) will have a starting point to train the software to understand reviews content regardless of which microformat/template is used.