hreview-issues

(Difference between revisions)

Jump to: navigation, search
(dtreviewed)
(Added issue for item info)
Line 46: Line 46:
* {{OpenIssue}} 2006-04-04 raised by [[User:Evan|Evan]].
* {{OpenIssue}} 2006-04-04 raised by [[User:Evan|Evan]].
*# It doesn't seem possible to give an approximate, average, or absolute '''price''' of the product or service in question. Examples: for a piece of software, the suggested retail price. For a restaurant, average price of an entree, ''or'' a '''price range'''. Prices should almost definitely have a ''currency'' marker and an ''amount''. Suggestion: ''<nowiki><span class="price"><abbr class="currency" title="Canadian dollars">$</abbr><span class="amount">10.99</span></span></nowiki>''. For a range, ''<nowiki><span class="pricerange"><span class="price"> ... </span> to <span class="price"> ... </span></span></nowiki>''.
*# It doesn't seem possible to give an approximate, average, or absolute '''price''' of the product or service in question. Examples: for a piece of software, the suggested retail price. For a restaurant, average price of an entree, ''or'' a '''price range'''. Prices should almost definitely have a ''currency'' marker and an ''amount''. Suggestion: ''<nowiki><span class="price"><abbr class="currency" title="Canadian dollars">$</abbr><span class="amount">10.99</span></span></nowiki>''. For a range, ''<nowiki><span class="pricerange"><span class="price"> ... </span> to <span class="price"> ... </span></span></nowiki>''.
 +
 +
<div class="hentry">
 +
=== Item ===
 +
*{{OpenIssue}} <span class="entry-summary author vcard"> <span class="published">2010-MM-DD</span> raised by <span class="fn">[[User:Codeguru413|Codeguru413]]</span></span>.
 +
<div class="entry-content discussion issues">
 +
* <strong class="entry-title"><abbr title="International Standard Book Number">ISBN</abbr>s should not be used as unique IDs for [hReview]s</strong>.
 +
 +
As I was reading the spec, I came across the following for the definition of the <b>item</b> portion of [[hReview]]: <i>"Non-<abbr title="Uniform Resource Locator">URL</abbr> unique item IDs (e.g. <abbr title="International Standard Book Number">ISBN</abbr>s, <abbr title="Universal Product Code">UPC</abbr>s) MAY be represented as a <abbr title="Uniform Resource Name">URN</abbr> ("url") for the item."</i> If you look at [http://www.isbn.org ISBN.org]'s website, they warn strongly against using <abbr title="International Standard Book Number">ISBN</abbr>s as unique IDs because often times, a book with the <em><strong>same title</strong></em> may have <em><strong>different</strong></em> <abbr title="International Standard Book Number">ISBN</abbr>s. Often, when we think of a book, what we really mean is a title. A book is just a particular publication of a title. As we know, books for a title can come in many different formats: softcover, hardcover, large print, illustrated, etc. Each publication will have a different <abbr title="International Standard Book Number">ISBN</abbr>.
 +
 +
There is no encoding within the <abbr title="International Standard Book Number">ISBN</abbr> number that accounts for whether a book of a certain title is a softcover or hardcover, rather, merely because they are two separately published items from the same or different publishers, they will have different <abbr title="International Standard Book Number">ISBN</abbr>s. This is especially problematic for [[hReview]] since that microformat is meant for aggregation. It is possible that reviews for a single title will be split across many different <em>books</em> simply because each review is tied to a (possibly) different <abbr title="International Standard Book Number">ISBN</abbr>. This makes it much more difficult to aggregate reviews for such items as books (ahem&mdash;or should I say, <em>titles</em> ;) ).
 +
 +
By using some other way to uniquely identify titles, reviews for titles can be aggregated and displayed for each instance of a title (e.g., a book). I know that unique identifiers are out of scope for [[hReview]]. I'm only suggesting that reviews should not use the <abbr title="International Standard Book Number">ISBN</abbr> of a book as a way to identify the title to which the review refers.
 +
 +
** No follow-up comments have been left yet.
 +
</div>
 +
</div>
== Template ==
== Template ==

Revision as of 18:16, 10 July 2010

hReview issues

These are externally raised issues about hReview with broadly varying degrees of merit. Thus some issues are REJECTED for a number of obvious reasons (but still documented here in case they are re-raised), and others contain longer discussions. Some issues may be ACCEPTED and perhaps cause changes or improved explanations in the spec.

IMPORTANT: Please read the hReview FAQ before giving any feedback or raising any issues as your feedback/issues may already be resolved/answered.

Submitted issues may (and probably will) be edited and rewritten for better terseness, clarity, calmness, rationality, and as neutral a point of view as possible. Write your issues well. — Tantek

Please add new issues to the top of the list. Please follow-up to resolved/rejected issues with new information rather than resubmitting such issues. Duplicate issue additions will be reverted.

See related hcalendar-issues and hcard-issues.

Contents


Issues

dtreviewed

I suggest using the ins tag, which defines text that has been inserted into a document and datetime specifies the date and time when the text was inserted/changed.

<ins class="dtreviewed" datetime="20050418">April 18th, 2005</ins>

rel="self"

OpenIssue 2005-01-04 by David Janes:

Atom defines rel="self" here

The value "self" signifies that the IRI in the value of the href attribute identifies a resource equivalent to the containing element.

HTML rel="boomark" here

Refers to a bookmark. A bookmark is a link to a key entry point within an extended document. The title attribute may be used, for example, to label the bookmark. Note that several bookmarks may be defined in each document.

Since we're using "bookmark" to mean the entry point to the hReview, isn't the "self" redundant or overly subtle?

Multilinguism

Price

Item

  • ISBNs should not be used as unique IDs for [hReview]s.

As I was reading the spec, I came across the following for the definition of the item portion of hReview: "Non-URL unique item IDs (e.g. ISBNs, UPCs) MAY be represented as a URN ("url") for the item." If you look at ISBN.org's website, they warn strongly against using ISBNs as unique IDs because often times, a book with the same title may have different ISBNs. Often, when we think of a book, what we really mean is a title. A book is just a particular publication of a title. As we know, books for a title can come in many different formats: softcover, hardcover, large print, illustrated, etc. Each publication will have a different ISBN.

There is no encoding within the ISBN number that accounts for whether a book of a certain title is a softcover or hardcover, rather, merely because they are two separately published items from the same or different publishers, they will have different ISBNs. This is especially problematic for hReview since that microformat is meant for aggregation. It is possible that reviews for a single title will be split across many different books simply because each review is tied to a (possibly) different ISBN. This makes it much more difficult to aggregate reviews for such items as books (ahem—or should I say, titles ;) ).

By using some other way to uniquely identify titles, reviews for titles can be aggregated and displayed for each instance of a title (e.g., a book). I know that unique identifiers are out of scope for hReview. I'm only suggesting that reviews should not use the ISBN of a book as a way to identify the title to which the review refers.

    • No follow-up comments have been left yet.

Template

Consider using this format (copy and paste this to the end of the list to add your issues; replace ~~~ with an external link if preferred) to report issues or feedback, so that issues can show up in hAtom subscriptions of this issues page. If open issues lack this markup, please add it.

Please post one issue per entry, to make them easier to manage. Avoid combining multiple issues into single reports, as this can confuse or muddle feedback, and puts a burden of separating the discrete issues onto someone else who 1. may not have the time, and 2. may not understand the issue in the same way as the original reporter.

<div class="hentry">
{{OpenIssue}} 
<span class="entry-summary author vcard">
 <span class="published">2011-MM-DD</span> 
 raised by <span class="fn">~~~</span>
</span>
<div class="entry-content discussion issues">
* <strong class="entry-title">«Short title of issue»</strong>. «Description of Issue»
** Follow-up comment #1
** Follow-up comment #2
</div>
</div>

Resolved Issues

Issues that are resolved but may have outstanding to-do items.

Closed Issues

Resolved issues that have no further actions to take.

default lower bound

default range

Specification Clarifications

Date and Time

Related pages

hreview-issues was last modified: Wednesday, December 31st, 1969

Views