[uf-discuss] The need for a Trackback microformat?

Manuel González Noriega manuel.gonzalez.noriega at gmail.com
Thu Dec 1 14:31:28 PST 2005

Hi Chris, Andreas, thanks for answering.

> Hmm. Sounds like a case for <blockquote cite="%url%"> or <cite>....
By <cite> I assume you mean <q> ? In any case, the need would remain
to distinguish regular quotes from trackbacks

> However, it would be interesting to do something like <a href="%url%"
> rel="trackback">xyz</a>...

Yes, that would be more like it, but

a) As Andreas said, rel trackback is already 'taken' to some extent by
common practice and with a different meaning.

b) I'd rather see a way to identify both container  and source for the trackback

Maybe something like:
<blockquote class="trackback">%content% <a href=""
class="trackback_source" href="%url%"></a>

> I didn't realize that the <cite> tag is basically worthless when it
> comes to inline citations to an external source... does this mean that
> one should always use blockquote and just style it to be inline?

No, <q> is for inline quotations, <cite> defines the source for the
citation, usually the name of the book, movie, etc.

> FYI, when you drop content into the Flock editor from another webpage,
> we properly add the <blockquote> tag with a citation to the original
> URL. If you parsed a page with such markup, you could theoretically
> infer trackback, n'est-ce pas?

I still couldn't say if it's a trackback or just you quoting someone,
could I ? :-)

BTW, off-topic, but now you mention dropping and blockquote, I
recently made a tiny experiment along those params:


a veces :) a veces :(
pero siempre trabajando duro para Simplelógica: apariencia,
experiencia y comunicación en la web.
http://simplelogica.net # (+34) 985 22 12 65

¡Ah! y escribiendo en Logicola: http://logicola.simplelogica.net

More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list