hReview brainstorming

(Difference between revisions)

Jump to: navigation, search
(added a few thoughts for hReview 0.4)
Current revision (06:03, 20 March 2010) (view source)
(some cleanup, incorporate vcp and category+rel-tag for v0.4)
 
(9 intermediate revisions not shown.)
Line 1: Line 1:
-
<h1> hReview brainstorming </h1>
+
<entry-title> hReview brainstorming </entry-title>
; Editor/Author: [http://tantek.com Tantek Çelik]
; Editor/Author: [http://tantek.com Tantek Çelik]
Line 5: Line 5:
This document is for capturing thoughts on improving/iterating upon [[hreview|hReview]].
This document is for capturing thoughts on improving/iterating upon [[hreview|hReview]].
 +
== hReview 0.4 thoughts ==
 +
* items of <code>type</code> <code>place</code> SHOULD use a nested [[geo]] or [[adr]] or [[hcard|hCard]] as the item itself.
 +
* items of <code>type</code> <code>url</code> MUST specify a <code>url</code> property for the item (in hReview 0.3 having "url" property for the item is only a SHOULD)
 +
* note that in the future, items of <code>type</code> <code>product</code> SHOULD use a nested [[hProduct]].
 +
* note and clarify that item <code>type</code> of "url" means the review applies to *only* the resource present at that URL, whether it is an HTML page, an image, an mp3, whatever.  Whereas item type of "website" applies to everything at that URL and contained in any subdirectories thereof.
 +
* consider deprecating the <code>version</code> property. is the <code>version</code> property needed?  currently it is optional and created invisibly by the [http://microformats.org/code/hreview/creator hReview creator]. It is not clear that it is necessary for parsing either, since all changes to hReview have been forward/backward compatible and it is our goal to continue to make compatible changes.
 +
* is the <code>type</code> property needed?  It too is created invisibly by the [http://microformats.org/code/hreview/creator hReview creator].
 +
* drop <code>self</code> from the <code>permalink</code>.  Even [[hatom|hAtom]] just uses <code>bookmark</code>, so should hReview.
 +
* should allow multiple license - switch to using [[item-license]].
 +
* item type fallback.  If the expected encapsulated microformat for a given item type (e.g. business / hCard) is not present, then fall back to parsing for item sub properties and construct an implied encapsulated microformat from those subproperties. Alternative, just take the fn, url, photo subproperties that are present as is, and don't bother to imply an hCard.
 +
* implied "fn" inside item.  if there is no "fn" then treat the entire "item" as an "fn".
 +
* if available the user shoul be able to specify a product id, such as an ISBN for books. (valid as long as no. 3 is open)
 +
 +
* incorporate {{must}} implement [[value-class-pattern]].
 +
 +
* consider adopting (for "skill" elements) category+[[rel-tag]] pattern like [[hCard]] and [[hCalendar]], don't require rel-tag.
 +
** same issue for [[hResume]], [[hReview-aggregate]], [[hListing]], [[hProduct]]
 +
** perhaps make category+rel-tag into a pattern for re-use.
-
== hReview 0.3 thoughts ==
 
 +
== archive ==
 +
=== hReview 0.3 thoughts ===
This iteration of hReview is directly in response to [[hreview-feedback]] and [[hreview-issues]].  See those documents for more details.
This iteration of hReview is directly in response to [[hreview-feedback]] and [[hreview-issues]].  See those documents for more details.
Line 29: Line 48:
-
== hReview 0.4 thoughts ==
+
==Related pages==
-
 
+
{{hreview-related-pages}}
-
* items of <code>type</code> <code>place</code> SHOULD use a nested [[geo]] or [[adr]] or [[hcard|hCard]] as the item itself.
+
-
* items of <code>type</code> <code>url</code> MUST specify a <code>url</code> property for the item (in hReview 0.3 having "url" property for the item is only a SHOULD)
+
-
* note that in the future, items of <code>type</code> <code>product</code> SHOULD use a nested [[product]] microformat.  [[hlisting|hListing]] has also shown that there may be need for a [[product]] microformat.
+
-
* note and clarify that item <code>type</code> of "url" means the review applies to *only* the resource present at that URL, whether it is an HTML page, an image, an mp3, whatever.  Whereas item type of "website" applies to everything at that URL and contained in any subdirectories thereof.
+
-
* is the <code>version</code> property needed?  currently it is optional and created invisibly by the [http://microformats.org/code/hreview/creator hReview creator]. It is not clear that it is necessary for parsing either, since all changes to hReview have been forward/backward compatible and it is our goal to continue to make compatible changes.
+
-
* is the <code>type</code> property needed?  It too is created invisibly by the [http://microformats.org/code/hreview/creator hReview creator].
+
-
* drop <code>self</code> from the <code>permalink</code>.  Even [[hatom|hAtom]] just uses <code>bookmark</code>, so should hReview.
+
-
* should allow multiple license
+

Current revision


Editor/Author
Tantek Çelik

This document is for capturing thoughts on improving/iterating upon hReview.

Contents

hReview 0.4 thoughts


archive

hReview 0.3 thoughts

This iteration of hReview is directly in response to hreview-feedback and hreview-issues. See those documents for more details.

Changes from hReview 0.2:

Informative improvements:


Related pages

hReview brainstorming was last modified: Saturday, March 20th, 2010

Views