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

[Othar Hansson]

Details of the aggregation are field-dependent and also up to the page
owner.  You're right that the natural aggregate of a date or a price
is the range.

--Othar



On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 11:06 AM, Toby A Inkster <mail at tobyinkster.co.uk> wrote:
> Othar Hansson wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
> But how are things to be aggregated? In some cases (like hReview's
> "rating"), the aggregate might be the numerical mean of the individuals. For
> other fields, the median, the mode or the range might be more suitable. For
> yet others, perhaps it would be desirable to see the sum of the individuals.
>
> For example, say you're creating an aggregate hCalendar event. Using an
> average dtstart and dtend is probably not very useful, but taking the
> earliest dtstart and latest dtend might be.
>
> --
> 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
>