[microformats-discuss] Re: Blog post format challenge - content vs summary

[Ryan King]

On Aug 13, 2005, at 6:29 PM, Geoffrey Glass wrote:
> Thanks for the comments Ryan & David.
>> Not bad, class="item" would be another option.
>
> I'm inclined towards Ryan's choice of "entry" from Atom.
>
> The word "post" may be inappropriate.

Innapropriate or not, its currently in use, esp. in Wordpress.

> My use cases for the format aren't necessarily restricted to blog  
> and form posts (neither is Atom).  For example, I have requests for  
> the ability of instructors to annotate assignments, in which case  
> an assignment would need to be tagged like a blog post.
>
> I don't know what the implications are of using a blog microformat  
> as a more generic format for sub-page-level content.

I can think of some significant ones which could make some people's  
heads explode. :D

> I have dark visions of authors of single-post pages running in  
> circles, duplicating page metadata (title, author, etc.) using both  
> HTML conventions (<title>, <meta>) and the microformat.

I think a microformat is much more necessary on multi-post pages  
(and, indeed, some blogs don't have a single-post-per-page mode),  
especially given your observation that some of the bases are covered.

> Are we creating a microformat analog to Atom, or are we only  
> providing a format for posts?

Here's what I want..

to create a microformat which could make RSS/Atom unnecessary,  
because I think it is uneccesary wheel-reinventing and would like to  
prove it. :D

> We could emulate core aspects of Atom

Of course, Atom is emulating the HTML, right?

> and say nothing about the nature of the content;

What nature?

I think the content best speak for itself.

>   or, we could say this is exclusively for blog posts (and possibly  
> forum posts), and any other use is outside the format (in my case,  
> I could use a different class on the root element of an assignment).

Personally, I'm interested in blogs, but that doesn't mean there  
can't be One True Post Microformat(TM).

>> Why not rel="self permalink" ?
>>
>> This is already in use for a lot of blogging platforms, I'm not  
>> sure  if there's a normative definition anywhere, but I think the  
>> semantics  are pretty well established.
>
> I haven't seen this, but I agree it's much better than my interim  
> choice of "link".  David's entrylink also seems reasonable.
>
>> I think this is a minority of blogs (though I may be wrong) and   
>> probably troublesome. Also, this method of posting has too many   
>> problems for us to solve here.
>
> Well, with an ID and permalink there's certainly enough information  
> to work out what's what. I disagree that this is uncommon,  
> especially if we look at the wider applications of syndication:   
> summary is certainly normal for commercial information services.

Point conceded.

> It's similar to the debate over partial- vs full-text feeds.

Where partial text feeds suck and full-text feeds are the only ones I  
read? :D
(Please no flaming here! Save that for something topical.)


-ryan