[uf-new] Comments proposals

[David Janes]

On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 9:42 AM, Martin McEvoy <martin at weborganics.co.uk> wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> @toby thank you for re-analysing the comment examples, you have done a good
> job
>
> Here Is my proposal for a comment microformat.
>
> On the whole to mark up comment's it is possible to use hAtom terms the only
> addition I would add is a rel-reply link. example and definition  are as
> follows
>
> example:  <a rel="reply" href="http://someblog/post#comment-001">link to
> this</a>
>
> *  reply[1] (comment-link) 60%
>  o By adding "rel-reply" the author is indicating that the page
> http://someblog/post#comment-001 is a reply for the referring page (see
> example).
>    1. reply MAY be defined as rfc4685 section 3[2] in-reply-to atom
> threading extension.
>    2. A parser MAY use the referring page http://someblog/post as the value
> of in-reply-to
>
> [1] http://microformats.org/wiki/comment-brainstorming#Proposal
> [2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4685#section-3

This is semantic nonsense. See my previous comments and Toby's from
last night, i.e. "this [parsing the URL] is a horrible idea"

-- 
David Janes
Mercenary Programmer
http://code.davidjanes.com