[uf-discuss] Microformat for news indexes?
angus at pobox.com
Wed Feb 8 14:39:29 PST 2006
> The way to answer the question "is hAtom enough?" is to try using it
> and see where if falls short.
To my mind, there were two questions I was asking: "is hAtom enough?" is
one, but "is hAtom appropriate?" is another. My impression - which may be
wrong - is that the use of a particular microformat conveys a kind of
implicit semantic contract that the data marked up in that format is of a
particular type, so I wanted to be sure that hAtom was appropriate for the
particular use I was interested in. (Or is there just no such thing as
'semantically inappropriate', as long as the microformat is syntactically
rich enough to express what you want and the components map in a rational
way to the data you're trying to represent?)
> ... The only thing I see in your list above
> that isn't in hAtom is 'image,' which could easily just be in the
> content of an post.
The other one that I think is missing is 'source' (i.e. "Reuters", "NY
Times" etc), which is perhaps more important. Interestingly, Atom (and
thus hAtom) doesn't appear to have a notion of 'source', whereas RSS 2.0
What would be the appropriate thing to do in that case? (a) propose
inclusion of 'source' in hAtom, (b) shrug and ignore it, or (c) propose
another purpose-built mu-format?
More information about the microformats-discuss