[uf-discuss] rel="muse" implies romantic relationship?

Ben Buchanan microformats at 200ok.com.au
Sun Dec 10 14:39:37 PST 2006

Hi there,

> Hi everyone, I'm pretty new to the mailing list, so apologies if this
> has already been covered.

Not that I've seen, so I guess ditto ;)

> According to the XFN spec, rel="muse" is a link to someone who inspires
> you, and is listed as being a "romantic" relationship. I was wondering
> if it is always implied as a romantic relationship, since one could
> certainly find someone else inspiring without being romantically
> involved/interested.

I tend to agree; certainly a quick dictionary check[1] does not say
anything about the relationship being romantic in the same sense as
other XFN classifications.

Probably the neatest definition is "the goddess or the power regarded
as inspiring a poet, artist, thinker, or the like". The defining
aspect of the relationship is inspiration.

I'm not really very well versed in classical mythology (thanks "modern
history only" high school); but despite the often-romantic
connotations of a relationship between goddess and mortal I think the
muse relationship still does not *require* a romantic link. Those with
more knowledge in the area can correct me if I'm wrong :)

All that said, the actual definition at http://www.gmpg.org/xfn/11
still works: "Someone who brings you inspiration." So, it's really
just that it's a bit misleading to include it in the "romantic"



[1] http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/muse

--- <http://www.200ok.com.au/>
--- The future has arrived; it's just not
--- evenly distributed. - William Gibson

More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list