Feedback

Thanks for your compliments, Marc. Been trying to give some decent feedback. You seem to be worried by Wild MicroContent, People making there own schema's, like happens on Reger.com (and on my weblogs by the way). Instead on focusing on the schema's, we should focus on the fields themselves. And create a registry for that and do some clearing there.

And dependent on the fields present, we can call it an event or a review, or whatever. The fields should define the MicroContent type and not vice-versa. Thus anything with a link to a product can be called a review. And anything with a rating is a review as well. And if there is an ISBN-id present as well, we know it is a book-review. And the clearing house might help clearing things up here. It will up to the tool-builders to use the right fields, so that any new schema can be propagated nicely.

[Inspiration Marc Canter]

Categories/tags: MicroContent • general • type
PermaLink • Comments • TrackBacks