Difference between revisions of "recipe-brainstorming"

From Microformats Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(revert vandalism from KyiXd2, changed back to last version from WillRaab)
(New ‘Format-In-Progress’ brainstorm as a start to pulling together. More formal structure adopted to try and make consensus clearer. Phae will be working on this tomorrow as well.)
Line 1: Line 1:
= recipe brainstorming =
+
= Recipe Brainstorming =
  
Towards a [[recipe]] microformat.  Please read [[process]] before editing this page.
+
Towards a [[recipe|Recipe]] microformat.  Please read the [[process]] before editing this page.
  
This page is currently a rough draft formed after surveying the [[recipe-examples]] and other related formats such as RecipeML and existing microformats. '''RecipeML MUST be documented in [[recipe-formats]], otherwise the reference is meaningless.'''
+
==Format-In-Progress==
  
'''This page is currently premature, as there first needs to be a [[recipe-formats]] page where pre-existing recipe formats are documented (e.g. RecipeML), BEFORE brainstorming, per the [[process]]'''
+
This format-in-progress follows the restarting of Recipe development by [[User:Phae|Frances Berriman]] on 25th September 2007. Note that this Format-In-Progress section is intended to be edited to reflect the discussion that occurs on the microformats-new list, rather than being a freeform playground for schema.
 +
 
 +
; Editors
 +
: [[User:BenWard|Ben Ward]] (Yahoo!, Inc.)
 +
 
 +
===Introduction===
 +
 
 +
Recipe is based on [[recipe-examples|examples]] and fields in [[recipe-formats|existing formats]].
 +
 
 +
* State scope here.
 +
 
 +
===Root Class Name===
 +
 
 +
To be decided. Likely ‘hRecipe’.
 +
 
 +
===Property List===
 +
 
 +
Recipe properties, with sub-properties listed in parentheses, like <em>(this)</em>, plurality indicated by square brackets, like <em>this[]</em>. Note that the draft property names may change, but their function should remain.
 +
 
 +
Optional and required for each field is explicitly stated at this stage. Fields without have not been determined.
 +
 
 +
* Title - Required.
 +
* Summary – A short introduction, accompanying statement about the recipe. Optional.
 +
* Author - An hCard for the author of the recipe. Optional.
 +
* Date Published - Optional
 +
* Photo[] - Accompanying image. Optional.
 +
* Ingredient[] (Quantity [Optional], Name [Required], ‘Optionality’ [Optional], Preparation Notes [Optional]) - 1 or more required.
 +
* Method - The block of text containing the method of the recipe. Required.
 +
 
 +
Ingredient > ‘Optionality’. States that an ingredient is optional to the recipe. Its absence should imply that the ingredient is required.
 +
 
 +
===Suggested fields for inclusion===
 +
 
 +
* License
 +
* Tags - using rel-tag.
 +
* Method > Steps or Method-Step[] as a child of Method. Imply ordered steps from an HTML list or explicitly mark-up ordered steps respectively.
 +
* Yield – Quantity produced by this recipe
 +
* Calories – per serving
 +
 
 +
===Known Issues===
 +
 
 +
* Mark-up of quantity would be enhanced by use of a [measure] microformat. However, such a format does not yet exist outside of brainstorming. It must be decided whether quantity is useful/parsable _enough_ without explicit mark-up of values and units.
 +
 
 +
==RecipeML-based Brainstorm==
  
==Suggested fields for inclusion==
 
 
Excerpted from [http://conoroneill.com/2006/03/21/what-if-i-suggest-a-structured-recipe-format-and-you-critique-it/ Conor Bandon's Blog entry] and derived from The RecipeML Spec:
 
Excerpted from [http://conoroneill.com/2006/03/21/what-if-i-suggest-a-structured-recipe-format-and-you-critique-it/ Conor Bandon's Blog entry] and derived from The RecipeML Spec:
 
*Recipe_Title
 
*Recipe_Title

Revision as of 00:20, 3 October 2007

Recipe Brainstorming

Towards a Recipe microformat. Please read the The microformats process before editing this page.

Format-In-Progress

This format-in-progress follows the restarting of Recipe development by Frances Berriman on 25th September 2007. Note that this Format-In-Progress section is intended to be edited to reflect the discussion that occurs on the microformats-new list, rather than being a freeform playground for schema.

Editors
Ben Ward (Yahoo!, Inc.)

Introduction

Recipe is based on examples and fields in existing formats.

  • State scope here.

Root Class Name

To be decided. Likely ‘hRecipe’.

Property List

Recipe properties, with sub-properties listed in parentheses, like (this), plurality indicated by square brackets, like this[]. Note that the draft property names may change, but their function should remain.

Optional and required for each field is explicitly stated at this stage. Fields without have not been determined.

  • Title - Required.
  • Summary – A short introduction, accompanying statement about the recipe. Optional.
  • Author - An hCard for the author of the recipe. Optional.
  • Date Published - Optional
  • Photo[] - Accompanying image. Optional.
  • Ingredient[] (Quantity [Optional], Name [Required], ‘Optionality’ [Optional], Preparation Notes [Optional]) - 1 or more required.
  • Method - The block of text containing the method of the recipe. Required.

Ingredient > ‘Optionality’. States that an ingredient is optional to the recipe. Its absence should imply that the ingredient is required.

Suggested fields for inclusion

  • License
  • Tags - using rel-tag.
  • Method > Steps or Method-Step[] as a child of Method. Imply ordered steps from an HTML list or explicitly mark-up ordered steps respectively.
  • Yield – Quantity produced by this recipe
  • Calories – per serving

Known Issues

  • Mark-up of quantity would be enhanced by use of a [measure] microformat. However, such a format does not yet exist outside of brainstorming. It must be decided whether quantity is useful/parsable _enough_ without explicit mark-up of values and units.

RecipeML-based Brainstorm

Excerpted from Conor Bandon's Blog entry and derived from The RecipeML Spec:

  • Recipe_Title
  • Summary Description (one liner)
  • Measurement System (U.S., Imperial etc)
  • Ingredients (each one a separate "item" rather than block text with count/amount/range/unit broken out too)
    • Some (e.g. meats, vegetables) could optionally be marked up with (elements of) the proposed species microformat. Andy Mabbett 06:41, 16 Nov 2006 (PST)
    • Ingredient importance (e.g. Main, Required, Optional) should be listed as an attribute of each entry. α
    • Units need separate microformat: see Measure microformat research
    • Ingredient Preparation: such as diced, chopped, sliced, grated, minced, etc. Steve Lewis 18:55, 11 Feb 2007 (PST)
  • Preparation Time (overall time)
  • Yield Quantity and Unit (4 pancakes or 5 servings)
  • Background Information - Optional section to encapsulate information that is useful but not necessarily required for a successful recipe. α
    • Author (Person) (hCard 1.0?)
    • Submitter (Person) (hCard 1.0?)
    • Source (Book Title etc)
    • Date (Of Creation or Publication)
    • Rights (Copyright or other)
    • Meal Category (Starter, entree, dessert )
    • Cuisine Category (Italian etc)
  • Instructions (text, but can contain:)
  • Photo (optional) Cameron Perry
    • Could be one per dish, or one for each (or for some of the) step(s). Andy Mabbett

Additional Suggestions

  • Difficulty/Notes - Perhaps incorporation of hReview to describe difficulty (using rating) and general comments (review), as an optional field. Frances Berriman
  • Suitability (e.g. vegetarian, vegan, wheat-free, etc.). Possibly rel="tag". Andy Mabbett 14:57, 16 Nov 2006 (PST)
  • Ingredient Grouping - In baking you need to differentiate wet from dry ingredients. See also an example recipe from extratasty.com for useful grouping in cocktail mixing. Steve Lewis 19:10, 11 Feb 2007
  • Number of dishes or similary - often it's mentioned how many dishes (or breads in baking, etc) the ingredients are for. WilleRaab 16:57, 20 Jul 2007 (PDT)
  • Suitable for occations - what occations are the dish suitable for? WilleRaab 16:57, 20 Jul 2007 (PDT)
  • Category - many sites categorize their recipes. WilleRaab 16:57, 20 Jul 2007 (PDT)

Note: Comments added "WilleRaab 16:57, 20 Jul 2007 (PDT)" are added after looking at http://tasteline.com, example: here.

Cookcamp brainstorming

At CookCamp in February 2007, Tantek moderated a fairly free form discussion of how to publish/share recipes. Here is a photo of the whiteboard:

422072573_9956d93f61.jpg

To Do: OCR this and enter rough notes here...


Issues

Scope

  • Is this intended for only food recipes, or also recipes for, say, glue, paint, dyes and other chemicals? Andy Mabbett 14:53, 16 Nov 2006 (PST)
    • +1 Wondered the same. I'd like to see this extended as a general recipe for anything that can be created in a defined way/order, rather than just edible food.Frances Berriman
    • Agreed. This format could apply to a set of methods and materials, including cooking, science experiments, craft making, building, etc. - essentially any how-to or tutorial. Cameron Perry
    • However, now I view my addition of 'calories per serving' as suspect, ;) though I guess it could still apply, since it's just a unit of energy. John LeMasney
      • Recipe for Nitroglycerine (not recommended by Weight Watchers) ? Andy Mabbett 10:43, 1 Feb 2007 (PST)
    • The scope is determined by the recipe-examples research that is done, other musings are purely theoretical and thus discouraged. So far this means recipes means only food recipes. In addition, "recipe" in common vernacular applies primarily to food. Other uses are certainly outside the common 80/20 (note that 80/20 does note mean there are no non-food cases, merely that they are outside the 80). If you want to pursue other types of recipes, e.g. "chemical-recipes" - start that as a separate research effort per the The microformats process. Tantek 07:39, 15 Mar 2007 (PDT)
  • Is it possible to have special structure for the details of the operations in the cooking. For Eg. I invite you to have a look at the following Page [1]. Should it be possible to have special markup for the operations? Or is that going too far? Maybe we could keep this open ended so that it could be included when sites would actually be interested in including the same... Anyway the article makes for some interesting reading though it is from 1985 ;-) SudarshanP 06:46, 26 Jun 2007 (PDT)

See Also