[uf-discuss] does hatom for comments make sense?

Karl Dubost karl at w3.org
Mon Sep 11 16:35:56 PDT 2006

Hi Steph,

Le 12 sept. 06 à 07:17, Stephanie Booth (bunny) a écrit :
> A while back somebody showed me a blog marked up with hatom. That
> person used hatom on the comments too (on the single post page) --
> that meant two hfeeds: one containing only the post, and another one
> with the comments.
> Does this way of using hatom on comments make sense to you? I noticed
> that neither K2 nor Sandbox wordpress themes do this.

Completely logical.

Each individual comment is nothing more than a weblog post.
The only technical difference is that it is not made on another  
weblog, but directly on the weblog of the person.

Each individual comment is structured like a weblog post.
It has  (required)
	- an id, the URI of the comment
	- a title, often the same than the original weblog post, sometimes a  
different (see SPIP)
	- a date when it has been done (updated)
It has (recommended)
	- often an author
	- content (core text of the comment)
	- link (the URI of the Weblog original post we are commenting on)

It just miss a summary, but that is not mandatory in Atom either.

IMHO, it should be an individual hatom entry for each comment, The  
way everything is aggregated and organized has a full feed is another  
debate. The date and link should help to create a pseudo thread.
It could be a full thread like in SPIP when the commenter has the  
possibility to reply to a specific comment in this case the link  
becomes the URI of the specific comment.

Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead
   QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/
      *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***

More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list