this_is_a_review tag

Adrain Cuthbert has a look at the hReview proposal. He has some comments:

• rel=’tag’ - a problem is that the tag refers to only a portion of the webpage or RSS-feed. I do not see that as a problem as long as you can distinguish the separate reviews. But it is some work for the parsers. I would prefer a machinereadable format with one review per URI;
• this_is_a_hreview-tag - he suggest a standard tag (this_is_a_hreview) in order to identify the namespace. In fact he suggests a standard tag corresponding to a MicroContent type. I have mixed feelings about this one. On the one end it is good to make this fact explicit. On the other hand are we supposed to this for all MicroContent types that are around the corner? Isn’t the review-target field sufficient? Within that field the identification of the namespace used should be present.
• class=’hreview’ - I guess I have a similar problem with this class definition. It defines the namespace used on a to high level: the MicroContent Item and not on the field-level;
• Universal Object Identifier - I agree with Adrian that one should not go into this. I should stay easy for the user. Adding a
  rev=

  attribute to the hyperlink sounds like a good solution, but it is not scalable to other MicroContent-types. More general would be

  ns:hreview:review-target

  . Read this as the review-target field from the hreview ns (namespace).

Categories/tags: format , microcontent; microformats; hreview
PermaLink • Comments • TrackBacks