qidydl at gmail.com
Wed Nov 1 10:23:39 PST 2006
On 11/1/06, Scott Reynen <scott at randomchaos.com> wrote:
> There is already an established meaning for rev="vote-for", and the
> reverse of that doesn't really communicate anything useful.
I don't know about that; I could certainly imagine, say, a proposal
asking people to vote by making blog posts and linking, and then the
proposal has a list showing who voted. It shouldn't be
*authoritative*, because only the person casting the vote can say for
sure that they voted a certain way.
> > for">...</a> ?
> I believe that means the page containing this link is voting for a
Hmm, isn't that backwards? somevotingfunction() is a vote-for the
current page. See the FAQ entry that you yourself linked. I very
much doubt that such a link makes sense, though.
More information about the microformats-discuss