[uf-discuss] does hatom for comments make sense?
davidjanes at blogmatrix.com
Tue Sep 12 00:16:08 PDT 2006
Right -- and a uF for expressing that relationship; this gets a little
trickier. As uFs are about codifying existing practices, my
(superficial) look at comment nesting shows that many sites (like
slashdot) using nesting to express relationships, not explicit URI
linking. On the other hand, threaded mail list managers do use links
to express the hierarchy.
The nice part is that this (hypothetical uF) composites with hAtom to
achieve our result; the trickier part is documenting nesting examples
to support the uF.
On 9/12/06, Karl Dubost <karl at w3.org> wrote:
> Just think that a comment is "a weblog post about a weblog post"
> uri1 <--- comment-x/uri2 about uri1
> <--- comment-xa/uri5 about uri2
> <--- comment-xb/uri6 about uri2
> <--- comment-y/uri3 about uri1
> <--- comment-z/uri4 about uri1
> It is just a question of having the right *atomic* model.
> and to make individual statements about things.
> Then the application layer is above.
More information about the microformats-discuss