service-formats: Difference between revisions

From Microformats Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m ()
m (fix link)
 
(4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
= Current Service Schemas =
== Current Service Schemas ==
This page shows a little of the current markup landscape on [[service|services]] sites as the basis for the design of a service microformat.


This page shows a little of the current markup landscape on services sites as the basis for the design of an hService microformat.
== existing in use formats ==
 
== Active Schemas ==
* [[http://base.google.com/base/services.txt Google Base Services Schema]]
* [[http://base.google.com/base/services.txt Google Base Services Schema]]
* [[http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/shopsb/shpsb_specs.php Yahoo Universal Schema]]
* [[http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/shopsb/shpsb_specs.php Yahoo Universal Schema]]
Line 10: Line 9:
We're ignoring RFP and contracts-oriented sites because they're not selling services but opportunities, and they're not in common use by a significant proportion of the population.
We're ignoring RFP and contracts-oriented sites because they're not selling services but opportunities, and they're not in common use by a significant proportion of the population.


== Problems with Active Schemas ==
== problems with current formats ==
In our view active schemas are too simplistic. Yahoo effectively prohibits service-specific fields, and Google Base permits only service_type as a service-specific field. Not useful if you're selling 5 kinds of garden waste services!
In our view active schemas are too simplistic. Yahoo effectively prohibits service-specific fields, and Google Base permits only service_type as a service-specific field. Not useful if you're selling 5 kinds of garden waste services!
* Such problems should cite real world examples of services documented on [[service-examples]], otherwise the problems are purely theoretical. [[User:Tantek|Tantek]] 19:37, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


== Conclusion ==
== conclusion ==
There is a need for a specific microformat dedicated to providing detailed universal structure to services provided to businesses and consumers.
There is a need for a specific microformat dedicated to providing detailed universal structure to services provided to businesses and consumers.


== Authors ==
== authors ==
* [[User:Wowitim|Wowitim]] 17:50, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
* [[User:Wowitim|Wowitim]] 17:50, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
== See Also ==
* [[service]]
* [[product]]
* [[hlisting]]

Latest revision as of 19:37, 2 April 2009

Current Service Schemas

This page shows a little of the current markup landscape on services sites as the basis for the design of a service microformat.

existing in use formats

We're ignoring RFP and contracts-oriented sites because they're not selling services but opportunities, and they're not in common use by a significant proportion of the population.

problems with current formats

In our view active schemas are too simplistic. Yahoo effectively prohibits service-specific fields, and Google Base permits only service_type as a service-specific field. Not useful if you're selling 5 kinds of garden waste services!

  • Such problems should cite real world examples of services documented on service-examples, otherwise the problems are purely theoretical. Tantek 19:37, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

conclusion

There is a need for a specific microformat dedicated to providing detailed universal structure to services provided to businesses and consumers.

authors

See Also