[uf-discuss] relatinal modeling in microformats?
scott at randomchaos.com
Wed Aug 2 07:50:07 PDT 2006
On Aug 2, 2006, at 9:26 AM, Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
> I didn't really have any particular expectations associated with the
> question, but if it's not modelled, then of course those possibilities
> are more limited. Not all even data ought to be specific to calendar
Sure, but we're not just modeling for the sake of modeling here. If
we don't have some specific problem that needs better data modeling,
it's not worth the additional complication for authors. RDF can
represent everything. Microformats are intentionally more limited in
scope to very practical needs of authors.
> Come to think of it, tnough, if I decide to post a CV online that
> includes among other things (includng publications) conference
> presentations, then if I can consistantly model those relations
> (article partOf journal, paper prsentation partOf conference), I could
> imagine interesting mashups and such, like maybe grabbing all the CV
> data for a group or department and processing it; members X, Y, Z
> presented at ABC Conference, etc.
Does that require anything more than vevent within hresume? Until
we've explored the limits of existing relevant microformats, I think
it's premature to discuss making changes to them. But if we can
identify something specific that's missing and needed in real-world
examples, that's where we should focus.
More information about the microformats-discuss