Structured blogging is beautiful

HcalendarStructured blogging is beautiful.  (via Lauren)

It is a misnomer, like every time I tell someone to use bloglines.com they say "I don’t read blogs" as if RSS was JUST about blogging.  So it isn’t really structured blogging, rather it is structured content.  This is a guy saying "you people have been trying to agree on standards for 10 years and we give up and declare this the standard."

Example.  The CAP standards for Common Alerting Protocol were released AFTER Katrina and Rita hit the Gulf Coast.  How simple is this?  Pretty simple actually.  Why years?  Why not in weeks?

We have a fundamental problem with our standards bodies and now the citizens are declaring standards.  Which is good.  I am all for it.

Wisdom of crowds, knowledge, wikipedia vs brittanica, what the hell?

If the wisdom of crowds confirms that the group is more intelligent than the expert, then this result is unexpected.  A close result is interesting, but does not prove the premise.

The experiment "sent 50 pairs of Wikipedia and Britannica articles on scientific topics to recognised experts and, without telling them which article came from which source, asked them to count the numbers of errors (mistakes, misleading statements or omissions). Among the 42 replies, Britannica content had an average of just under 3 errors per article whilst Wikipedia had an average of just under 4 errors