I use microformats whenever I can. Usually it just makes sense anyway, as frequently when I have an address block, I may want to style some elements differently then other elements, and that makes it super easy. It's not like microformats are that hard to figure out.
There has been a couple of instances where, because I was using a microformat, I was able to re-use the markup of a certain portion of a site somewhere else (as an include), and not have to change the markup, only the styling.
Finally, ever since I really stated exploring microformats, I got better at writing semantic markup and better at naming CSS classes.
I use SIOC, FOAF, DOAP and some other lightweight RDF vocabularies. A popular trend these days is to embed RDF in web documents using RDFa. At that point the border b/w RDF vocabs and microformats starts to disapper.
With search engines getting better the need for semantic markup will rather rise. For an example, take a look at microformats and vocabs that Yahoo SearchMonkey apps can use: SearchMonkey vocabularies
Once search engines can make sense of richer data (even if at first it is just to display richer data about a match found) people will also get more motivation to use semantic markup.
What additional documentation do you think is missing and would be useful to have?
I've used all three, but of the lot I'd have to say microformats have the most momentum these days. It has the advantage of being very easy to implement, even as an afterthought, on existing sites. And while there don't seem to be a lot of microformat consumers in the wild at this point, that situation is starting to change with the next generation of browsers.
As for the relevance of semantic markup in general, anything that makes it easier to automate the gathering of data is going to contribute to a richer ecosystem of applications that use that data. Relying on search engines for this kind of contextual processing does not address the needs of more focused or niche applications.
I use RDFa as it has the important feature of being able to say anything, even really bizarre or obscure facts (such as the properties of archaeological finds, or the number of friends Paris Hilton has on MySpace), and doing so unambiguously.
I was recently working on a Search Monkey plugin to display VCal data embedded as RDFa, and stumbled upon a couple of cases where you just need that extra little bit of data to connect things. They were: connecting a presentation to the slides used during the presentation, and connecting a web page to its primary topic so you can tell exactly what the page is about.
Its difficult to see how you would answer those use cases with Microformats, there is neither context or precision in the markup. Over time I'll want to add more detail to my RDFa to help different groups of people find my pages and buy stuff.
Dublin Core is available in RDF and RDFa, but the old DC meta tags have similar issues to Microformats and even lower active use as far as I know.
I agree with CaptSolo that while DC and other meta data standards are old hat, RDFa is a growth area. RDFa.info chronicle each new user as it comes along. I'd go further and predict that microformats will quickly die off as more people 'get' RDF and more RDF-aware tools are produced.
At yahoo we support RDFa, eRDF, and microformats in page's markup.
To see what we have harvested, install my SearchMonkey plugin, and then do any search using Yahoo. You should see an infobar below showing the semantic data.
I can't post links since I'm a new user, but goto the SearchMonkey gallery, and look for "Structured Data Display". Its under technology.
发布评论
评论（6）
我尽可能使用微格式。 通常，无论如何，它都是有意义的，因为当我有一个地址块时，我可能希望对某些元素设置与其他元素不同的样式，这使得它非常容易。 微格式并不是那么难以理解。
有几个例子，因为我使用的是微格式，所以我能够在其他地方重复使用网站特定部分的标记（作为包含），而不必更改标记，只需更改标记造型。
最后，自从我真正开始探索微格式后，我在编写语义标记和命名 CSS 类方面变得更好了。
I use microformats whenever I can. Usually it just makes sense anyway, as frequently when I have an address block, I may want to style some elements differently then other elements, and that makes it super easy. It's not like microformats are that hard to figure out.
There has been a couple of instances where, because I was using a microformat, I was able to re-use the markup of a certain portion of a site somewhere else (as an include), and not have to change the markup, only the styling.
Finally, ever since I really stated exploring microformats, I got better at writing semantic markup and better at naming CSS classes.
我使用 SIOC、FOAF、DOAP 和其他一些轻量级 RDF 词汇表。 如今的流行趋势是使用 RDFa 将 RDF 嵌入到 Web 文档中。 那时，黑白 RDF 词汇和微格式的边界开始消失。
随着搜索引擎变得越来越好，对语义标记的需求将会增加。 例如，看一下 Yahoo SearchMonkey 应用程序可以使用的微格式和词汇：
SearchMonkey 词汇
一旦搜索引擎能够理解更丰富的数据（即使一开始这只是为了显示有关找到的匹配的更丰富的数据）人们也会有更多的动机使用语义标记。
您认为还缺少哪些额外文档但补充哪些文档会很有用？
I use SIOC, FOAF, DOAP and some other lightweight RDF vocabularies. A popular trend these days is to embed RDF in web documents using RDFa. At that point the border b/w RDF vocabs and microformats starts to disapper.
With search engines getting better the need for semantic markup will rather rise. For an example, take a look at microformats and vocabs that Yahoo SearchMonkey apps can use:
SearchMonkey vocabularies
Once search engines can make sense of richer data (even if at first it is just to display richer data about a match found) people will also get more motivation to use semantic markup.
What additional documentation do you think is missing and would be useful to have?
我们在 Praized 开发的发布商工具中烘焙了微格式（主要是在我们向博主提供的插件工具中） ）
由于我们系统中的核心对象是“地点”，因此我们认为输出微格式是明智的。
We baked microformats in the publisher tools we develop at Praized (mostly in the plugin tools we provide to bloggers)
Since the core Object in our system is "places", we thought it was sensible for us to output microformats.
这三种格式我都用过，但我不得不说，目前微格式的发展势头最为强劲。 它的优点是非常容易在现有站点上实施，即使是事后才想到的。 虽然目前似乎还没有很多微格式消费者，但随着下一代浏览器的出现，这种情况开始发生变化。
至于一般语义标记的相关性，任何使数据收集自动化变得更容易的方法都将有助于形成更丰富的使用该数据的应用程序生态系统。 依靠搜索引擎进行这种上下文处理并不能满足更有针对性或利基应用程序的需求。
I've used all three, but of the lot I'd have to say microformats have the most momentum these days. It has the advantage of being very easy to implement, even as an afterthought, on existing sites. And while there don't seem to be a lot of microformat consumers in the wild at this point, that situation is starting to change with the next generation of browsers.
As for the relevance of semantic markup in general, anything that makes it easier to automate the gathering of data is going to contribute to a richer ecosystem of applications that use that data. Relying on search engines for this kind of contextual processing does not address the needs of more focused or niche applications.
我使用 RDFa 因为它具有能够说出任何内容的重要特征，甚至是非常奇怪或晦涩的事实（例如 考古发现，或帕丽斯·希尔顿 (Paris Hilton) 在 MySpace 上的朋友数量)，并且毫不含糊地这样做。
我最近正在开发一个要显示的搜索猴子插件VCal 数据嵌入为 RDFa，并偶然发现了几种情况，您只需要额外的一点数据来连接事物。 它们是：将演示文稿连接到演示期间使用的幻灯片，并将网页连接到其主要主题，以便您可以准确地了解该页面的内容。
很难看出如何使用微格式回答这些用例，标记中既没有上下文也没有精度。 随着时间的推移，我希望向 RDFa 添加更多详细信息，以帮助不同群体的人找到我的页面并购买东西。
Dublin Core 可在 RDF 和 RDFa 中使用，但据我所知，旧的 DC 元标记与微格式有类似的问题，甚至活跃使用率更低。
我同意 CaptSolo 的观点，虽然 DC 和其他元数据标准已经过时，但 RDFa 是一个增长领域。 RDFa.info 记录每个新用户的出现。 我会更进一步预测，随着越来越多的人“获得”RDF 以及更多支持 RDF 的工具的产生，微格式将很快消亡。
I use RDFa as it has the important feature of being able to say anything, even really bizarre or obscure facts (such as the properties of archaeological finds, or the number of friends Paris Hilton has on MySpace), and doing so unambiguously.
I was recently working on a Search Monkey plugin to display VCal data embedded as RDFa, and stumbled upon a couple of cases where you just need that extra little bit of data to connect things. They were: connecting a presentation to the slides used during the presentation, and connecting a web page to its primary topic so you can tell exactly what the page is about.
Its difficult to see how you would answer those use cases with Microformats, there is neither context or precision in the markup. Over time I'll want to add more detail to my RDFa to help different groups of people find my pages and buy stuff.
Dublin Core is available in RDF and RDFa, but the old DC meta tags have similar issues to Microformats and even lower active use as far as I know.
I agree with CaptSolo that while DC and other meta data standards are old hat, RDFa is a growth area. RDFa.info chronicle each new user as it comes along. I'd go further and predict that microformats will quickly die off as more people 'get' RDF and more RDF-aware tools are produced.
在雅虎，我们在页面标记中支持 RDFa、eRDF 和微格式。
要查看我们收获了什么，请安装我的 SearchMonkey 插件，然后使用 Yahoo 进行任何搜索。 您应该在下面看到一个显示语义数据的信息栏。
由于我是新用户，所以无法发布链接，但请转到 SearchMonkey 库，然后查找“结构化数据显示”。 它处于技术之下。
At yahoo we support RDFa, eRDF, and microformats in page's markup.
To see what we have harvested, install my SearchMonkey plugin, and then do any search using Yahoo. You should see an infobar below showing the semantic data.
I can't post links since I'm a new user, but goto the SearchMonkey gallery, and look for "Structured Data Display". Its under technology.