[uf-discuss] Chat microformat/podcast transcript

Chris Messina chris.messina at gmail.com
Fri Apr 14 00:42:58 PDT 2006

On 4/12/06, Jude Robinson <jude at dotcode.com> wrote:
> Would it be appropriate to add this to
> http://microformats.org/wiki/chat-examples under a tentative "*might be
> relevant to chat*" "podcast transcripts" heading?

Sure. It's a kind of chat... though I wonder if there isn't some
distinction to be made between aural and text-based chats?

> > [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/struct/lists.html#h-10.3,
> > yeah, i know, it actually says, right there in the
> > 4.01 spec, that DL's might be used to mark up
> > dialog, but dialog isn't a definition, is it? i
> > don't like it. but that's just me.
> I agree entirely. Think it very odd and reckon <cite> and
> <q>/<blockquote> more appropriate. Don't understand the dl suggestion at
> all.

I disagree, but then I've always been a fan of DLs. The problem that I
see with only using <q> <cite> and <bq> is that they're ways of
loosely pairing a speaker and what they've said. I don't know of any
way to closely couple the two.

At least with DT and DD there's a clear correlation for the speaker
with her/his words:

speaker 1:
    something that speaker 1 said
speaker 2:
    something that speaker 2 said

> <tangent>Would it be correct to use hCard for the people in a
> transcript, or am I jumping the gun/plain wrong?</tangent>

That's the intended "building block" design of microformats... so yes,


More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list