|
|
|
01 Sep 2005
Review and
Phillip Pearson created an overview of schema’s for review and event MicroContent types. Maybe my review of review formats comes in handy as well.
Lately I started thinking about Wild MicroContent. Wild MicroContent allows any user to define his own MicroContent type. However some standardisation is still required. One is about translating a type to a format. One could use a microformat or the structuredblogging approach for this.
But for the definition of a MicroContent type one must do something else. I suggest that one standardises on fields. Thus the meaning of a field title, summary, description, tags, longitude, latitude, etc. must be well defined. The user can combine any of these fields in order to define a new MicroContent type.
But what is then a review or an event? For me a review is an (blog) item about something. And that about can be anything: comments on a web-site, comments on a book, comments on my latest coffee machine, etc. The main difference with a standard blog-post, is that the about is made explicit in a separate field, such as the item url. This item url defines the about item. This url can be a link to Amazon, to an ISBN-directory or just a permalink of a blog. Thus a review is only a review when it contains an item url. And the user can add fields he want: a longitude and latitude if he reviews a tourist spot, an item type if he wants to review a book and a datetime if he wants to review an event.
Which brings us to the next question: what is an event? An event clearly must have a date and time related to it. One could add a location, but that is not necessary. There are events without a location, on Internet for example. And even an item url might not be required. But naturally one can add these in order to make the event item more specific.
And I assume that the basics of a MicroContent item: a title and a permalink have been added to the event and review as well. A description would be useful as well.