|
|
|
25 May 2005
MicroContent scraping
On the Ryan King an entry describes the scraping advantage of microformats. I am not so fond of scraping. I see it as a second order solution. We should head for real API’s, which can be used by WebServices. One of the elements of such a solution would be the storage of separate MicroContent entries ins separate well-formed XML files. We can always revert to scarping, but let’s try to move up.
Categories/tags:
general
microcontent; microformat; scraping
PermaLink •
(1)
Comments •
TrackBacks •
Trackback URL
Comments
Hey, thanks for the link.
You know, when I wrote that I really shouldn’t have used the word ‘scraping.’ What I was talking about was like scraping in that it is the consumption of html pages, but if you have well-formed, meaningful xhtml, its not scraping, its parsing. So, I think my terminology was probably unfortunate there.
In a sense, we replace the second-order solution (scraping) with a first-order solution (parsing or consuming).
You suggest that we should have “seperate MicroContent entries in seperate well-formed XML files.”
I say, “what’s wrong with XHTML”? Its XHTML, you can have ‘microcontent’ in it. And the bonus is that you don’t have to maintain two representations of your data.