[uf-new] Re: Comment Questions

Martin McEvoy martin at weborganics.co.uk
Thu Nov 13 06:00:02 PST 2008

Toby A Inkster wrote:
> Martin McEvoy wrote:
>> Toby A Inkster wrote:
>> > What's wrong with simply using hAtom as it is (possibly with the
>> > addition of Sarven's "in-reply-to" proposal)?
>> because a "comment" does not fit into the concept of a hEntry, comments
>> lack the entry-title element, in fact a "title" it is almost
>> non-existent in a comment.
> hAtom is still a draft format. This use case might be a convincing 
> argument for hAtom 0.2 to drop the requirement for entry-title, and 
> make it an optional property.
>> The majority of the proposed comment schema[1] will work with standard
>> hAtom tools
>> [1] http://microformats.org/wiki/comment-brainstorming#Schema
> The example given there doesn't have a root class name of "hentry", so 
> would not be picked up by existing hAtom parsers.
You would have to place the current proposed markup inside an hEntry... 
parsers would have to change (a little)

Ok lets re-use hatom terms only this works...

<div class="hentry">
   <address class="author vcard">
       <span class="entry-title"><a class="url fn" 
href="http://contributor.com/blog/">Contributor</a> said</span>
   about <abbr class="updated" title="2008-09-01T14:40:45+01:00">72 days 
   <div class="entry-content">
      <p>Hey Great Post</p>
   <a rel="bookmark" href="#comment-001">link to this</a>

Is this proposed mark up acceptable there is a test page here: 

and the extracted Atom Is here: 

Is the above mark-up acceptable to everyone?

Best Wishes


Martin McEvoy


More information about the microformats-new mailing list