tantekedited /hcard (+121) "fix some alignment, simpler intro, shorter descriptions, nowrap so they align even when narrower, float both to avoid text overlapping" (view diff)
tantekplease take a look and see if that helps with the introduction of common properties (which I think is the 2nd most common thing people will look for after the very simple examples at the top) http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard - cc: Phae aaronpk hober mkowens singpolyma
tantekgood morning Phae, would appreciate your review/thoughts of the usability/readability of the new section I added to the hCard spec, in terms of how it reads from the beginning: microformats.org/wiki/hcard
tantekmorning neuro - take a look at microformats.org/wiki/hcard and let me know what you think of the new list of common properties and example next to it
tantekneuro - I've heard the opposite (about left vs right) - I think having the more english readable list on the left is a nicer reference for most folks
neuro`tantek: just did some tests, and a visual separator doesn't add any readability, so forget about it. And yes, for normal people, English first, code second makes sense.
ChiefRAtantek: a) I would somehow combine the "Property list" section with "Properties" one-on-one (making only one section) b) I would of placed "Properties" 1st, then "Property list" 2nd and then "Property notes" sections first and then the "Example" one for usability.
tantekIn addition, I've had the suggestion from folks that they want/need to see very simple a markup example of each property as they're reading the simple list, and as such the side-by-side layout is the most compact I could come up with (being able to see as much of that on the screen at once also improves usability)
tantekFinally, the decision to do the markup example of each property next to the list of common properties led to realizing it should all make sense as part of a single composite example which you could copy/paste (which people *will* do because that's what they do with example) and thus it made sense to reduce the common properties set down to what people actually *do* commonly publish.
tantekThus a) we still need a "property list" section with the full list of properties *somewhere else* (that I'm still figuring out how to best design), and b) keeping the example of the common properties adjacent to the list of common properties themselves is *better* for usability, than separating them into different sections where people would have to scroll back/forth to look at a property definition vs. use in markup.
tantekAlternatively, if you think you've figured out a better content design for that section, try a sample edit of it on your user page, and show some folks in comparison to what's on hCard right now and see what feedback you get.
mkowenstantek: I feel like there's probably two sets of properties, sort of like "Core" and "Extended" properties. I don't exactly know how to delineate them, but the current list seems fine as of right now, in my opinion (at least with the limitations of the wiki format).
tantekmkowens - yeah, in theory there shouldn't need to be such a delineation, due to the process and 80/20 rule, but in practice with hCard and hCalendar I took all of vCard and iCalendar and that was probably a mistake.
tantekthat being said, even some of the presumably 80/20 properties from research end up not being used as often as the data would have led us to expect
tantekmkowens, fair enough. including all of vCard and iCalendar EVENT object was perhaps not so much a mistake as a "best first guess" that I should have iterated further on and dropped various properties accordingly.
mkowensYeah. I'm not a fan. And you're probably right regarding the use of "Common" versus "Core." I just feel like the connotation of "Core" and "Common" are both different. "Common" feels—to me, at least—not definitive, but rather entirely observational.
tantekso yes, any time you see someone refer to "core", in a spec, ask them, what makes it "core"? what are the practical distinctions between "core" and other parts?
tantekbarnabywalters - good point. he could use hCard and rel=me both on his "vcard style site" as well as on his blog home page where he links to several other profiles: http://visualidiot.com/
Loqi[http://twitter.com/idiot] @BarnabyWalters Trouble is, though, I try to give as little info away as possible, which means it probably fails hCard validation.
singpolymahCard validation :P part of the problem with microformats listing "required attributes" is people get the dumb idea that if they don't have those attributes, they shouldn't use the microformat
tantekalso - note that the "required" properties in hCard/hCalendar/hAtom came directly from the requirements in vCard/iCalendar/Atom - and carrying that "required" semantic forward was a mistake (I'll take responsibility for that)
singpolymainvalid in that I was either missing a required attribute (I think author is "required" in hAtom, or was). or the wrong format (I used to publish hAtom with wrong-formatted dates all the time)
singpolymaI publish valid <time> these days :) Back in the day I would just dump whatever the default format on my Blogger system was, because that used to be the only option.
singpolymabecause my hAtom parsers can happily handle any date format (and that's all I ever parsed it with) and also because I consider some semantics ("this is the date") better than none ("this is some text")
singpolymaI don't know if something like the hCard creator can be made very good, but I'm willing to be proven wrong :) Usually CMS plugins work well IME