[uf-new] re: Microformats support for aggregate reviews

[Othar Hansson]

Adding a new microformat for aggregate reviews seems like the wrong
direction to me, because we're adding one that will have strictly
fewer users than hReview itself.

Will we do the same for aggregates of everything?  products, listings,
events, etc. could all reasonably have aggregates to describe "what's
on a page".

Why don't we just define a trivial microformat "aggregate", which
contains one value "count", and can wrap any other microformat?  The
fields of the wrapped microformat get a new meaning: any given field
is meant to be an aggregate of all the other data associated with the
page.  E.g., a hypothetical price field should contain a price range.
A rating field should contain an aggregrate rating.  etc.

--Othar



On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 8:26 AM, Myers, Jay <Jay.Myers at bestbuy.com> wrote:
>
> Good morning Kavi,
>
> I am putting together an example this morning to post on the wiki. A
> couple of issues that I ran into with the "postcard" example we talked
> about earlier this week:
>
> -- hReview has a required item attribute. I decided to put an href
> around the stars that points to a product detail page url. It might not
> be the most solid workaround, but we can certainly work on that either
> through the format itself, or altering the html to include the name of
> the product.
> -- in many examples there is a total number of reviews. I have added the
> class "num" to identify this. Completely up for debate on the naming...
>
> I should be able to create more examples from other sites next week...
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jay
>
>
> Jay Myers
> Lead Web Development Engineer
> Online Solutions, BestBuy.com
> jay.myers at bestbuy.com
> (w) 612-291-4007
> (c) 612-296-5836
> (twitter) @jaymyers
> (skype) jaymmyers
> -----Original Message-----
> From: microformats-new-bounces at microformats.org
> [mailto:microformats-new-bounces at microformats.org] On Behalf Of Kavi
> Goel
> Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 4:26 PM
> To: For discussion of new microformats.
> Subject: Re: [uf-new] re: Microformats support for aggregate reviews
>
> Hi all,
>
> Here is a quick update on conversations around microformats aggregate
> reviews support. I've updated the aggregate-review-brainstorming wiki
> page based on our IRC conversation a few weeks ago:
> http://microformats.org/wiki/aggregate-review-brainstorming
>
> The short summary of the proposal that emerged from the discussion
> over IRC is as follows:
> - define a new microformat that contains two elements. 1) number of
> reviews, and 2) an embedded hReview
> - fields in the embedded hReview (i.e. rating, summary, item type)
> would refer to aggregate information. For example, the rating is the
> average rating across all reviews.
>
> Why this proposal?
> - the new microformat would contain only one element (at least in an
> initial version) to keep things simple according to the 80% rule
> - creating a new microformat rather than extending hReview provides
> flexibility to potentially add more aggregate-only fields in the
> future without cluttering hReview.
>
> If this approach seems like a good one, Jay Myers and/or I will also
> add a few examples of how this markup could look for some sites.
>
> One issue we ran into when trying to apply this to Best Buy and Amazon
> pages -- on many pages, the entire page is about a product, whereas
> only a section of the page is about the reviews. On the other hand,
> for sites like Yelp, the entire page is about the reviews, and only a
> section of the page is about the product spec. So it probably makes
> sense to allow embedded reviews in hProduct's as well as embedded
> hProduct's in hReview's depending on the hierarchy that naturally
> exists on the page.
>
> Kavi
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Kavi Goel <kavi at google.com> wrote:
> >
> > In order to move this discussion about aggregate reviews along, I'd
> > like to have a discussion over IRC. As a heads-up, I'll plan on
> > discussing alternatives around 2PM Pacific time tomorrow. For folks in
> > different timezones who will be out enjoying the nightlife, sleeping
> > or otherwise away from a computer, please feel encouraged to post
> > ideas via this email discussion or on the brainstorming wiki here:
> > http://microformats.org/wiki/aggregate-review-brainstorming
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Kavi
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 12:48 AM, Toby A Inkster
> <mail at tobyinkster.co.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > Jamie Rumbelow wrote:
> > >
> > >> See, comments like that lead me on to think that we need some form
> of
> > >> pagination system for microformats - pagination is much more
> popular among
> > >> sites these days and a rel="paginate" might come in handy.
> > >
> > > HTML already has perfectly good rel="next"/"prev" for that.
> > >
> > > http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/types.html#type-links
> > >
> > > --
> > > Toby A Inkster
> > > <mailto:mail at tobyinkster.co.uk>
> > > <http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > microformats-new mailing list
> > > microformats-new at microformats.org
> > > http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
> _______________________________________________
> microformats-new mailing list
> microformats-new at microformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
>
> _______________________________________________
> microformats-new mailing list
> microformats-new at microformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new