[uf-discuss] hReview Question/Statement

[David Janes -- BlogMatrix]

Tantek Çelik wrote:

>>From a schema standpoint, yes, agreed completely.  As to the names of the
> specific fields, as noted above, we can reuse the property/"value" construct
> from hCard, and avoid having to have both "rated" and "rating".
> 
> Thanks very much for the feedback David.  This will be a definite
> improvement in hReview 0.3.

I'm getting into the spirit of what the spec meanings now, so it's all 
becoming a little clearer. I've modified my parser a bit to reflect 
your's and Ryan's comments, plus a better understanding how 
reviewer/item works.

Here's some parsed hReviews, randomly chosen:

http://tinyurl.com/ctg6m
http://tinyurl.com/c7kyd
http://tinyurl.com/dmxnr
http://tinyurl.com/99nwc

Regards, etc...
David