[uf-discuss] hReview and the structured blogging tools

Tantek Ç elik tantek at cs.stanford.edu
Thu Jan 12 09:19:03 PST 2006

On 1/12/06 9:10 AM, "David Janes -- BlogMatrix" <davidjanes at blogmatrix.com>

> As you know, the structured blogging people have released plugins [1]
> for MT and WordPress that generate microformatted output and, well,
> structured blogging output.
> I tried using their review generator and produced [2] which you can see
> [3] doesn't quite get the encoding of the reviews correct.
> I was going to send some comments to Phil Pearson about this

I believe Phil is on this list and is eagerly accepting feedback.

> but I'm 
> really not sure what the correct way to encode the review rating are. In
> particular:
> (1) are the sub-ratings (i.e. quality of service: 3/5) always going to
> be dependent on rel-tag


> (2) if it does ... where should the authority be for tags be? Is
> "anything will do" the correct answer?

It is whereever the reviewer wishes it to be.  Whatever tagspace the
reviewer believes best defines the rated tags that they are using.  This is
no different than rel-tag itself in general.

> [1] http://structuredblogging.org/
> [2] http://www.davidjanes.com/wp/?p=3
> [3] http://tinyurl.com/behre



More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list