|
|
|
17 Jun 2005
Comment MicroContent type
Andy Smith posts a proposal for a Comment MicroContent type. The format contains the following fields (taken from the small example):
- url - I guess that is the link that is commented on;
- commenter - the author of the comment. Why not call this just author?
- dtcommented - the date and time the comment was published. Why not just dt?
- description - the actual comment;
- url - the link (permalink) to this comments. That sounds good, but way call it url as well? That is confusing. Call is permalink, or whatever;
I guess this is a very simple proposal. It is very similar to the fields of a blog-entry (as it should). Only the url field has been added. Which makes me wonder whether it is not possible to propose a single field, which is added upon another format.
Andy Smith also created an extended version with some extra fields, which I guess are then not required.
- version - the version number of the format;
- commenter - an extended version of the commenter, which is in fact an hCard:
- url nickname - a url to the person;
- fn - the full name of the commenter
- photo - the photo of the commenter
- url thread parent - I am not quite sure what this one is about. The original item in the thread?;
- summary - a summary of the comment;
Th extended version is also pretty clear. What I do not like of this example is that is text, which appears in unnamed span’s, such as Regarding: and By:. Although one could see that as the template into which the MicroContent Item is formatted.
What I would like to see, is how all these MicroContent types are related to each other. Who builds on who? Which fields are added? What is new? Anyway I like this format, as it supports my idea of having a comment as a separate MicroContent type.