[microformats-discuss] Re: Proposing RelSource

Eran limbo at speakeasy.net
Wed Jul 13 01:53:42 PDT 2005

Tim said:
> OK - I see where you're going with this. But I would ask, 
> what difference does it make? Essentially you are creating a 
> works cited list for your post. 

Not quite, I'm describing a distributed conversation. Quoting your
immediate source on the Blogosphere is interesting for several reasons
(e.g. meme propagation) and is just good netiquette. Encoding the
relationship between your post and the source post (reply, forward,
etc.) can be the basis for tracking a conversation that takes place
simultaneously on several different blogs. 

> So why not just code it:
> ---*---
> <a href="http://tantek.com/interesting-blog-post" 
> rel="cite">Tantek said:</a> <blockquote> Quoting from 
> Tantek's post here... </blockquote>
> Blah blah blah...
> <a href="http://theryanking.com/blog/blog-post-i-read" 
> rel="cite">Ryan King</a>
> ---*---

1. "cite" is not a valid value for a rel attribute.
2. if we're to expand XHTML, it's better to do it by reusing existing
elements as much as possible. The CITE element already exists and has
the semantic context we need.
3. rel="cite" is not specific enough to solve the problem.

> I like the idea of 
> keeping the formats as simple as possible.

The format is indeed as simple as possible while still solving the
problem at hand and conforming with (what I understand as) the
principles of microformats.
> (Note: I realize that I eliminated the <cite> element. I 
> suppose a better structure would be <cite rel="source.uri"> 
> or some such thing. I don't have the spec handy at the moment.)

Rel="source.uri" doesn't seem to make much sense. Under XHTML2.0 we
could use
<cite cite="source.url" rel="via">
But as far as I can tell, those attributes are not available under


More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list