[uf-discuss] Should microformat features (like rel-tag) have explicit scope?

Brian Suda brian.suda at gmail.com
Fri Feb 2 06:09:11 PST 2007

On 2/2/07, Derrick Lyndon Pallas <derrick at pallas.us> wrote:
> Take the example of a dead relative: there is no way to put a family
> tree with relatives you need to tag as "deceased" on your own page
> without a document level parser concluding that you are dead.

--- that is not true, you are not confusing that YOU ARE DEAD, you are
only saying that the page has information about 'dead'. Rel-tag when
applied to the whole page simply says that there is some information
on this page related to 'X'. Nothing more... when you scope it to a
specific microformat it gains further meaning about ONLY that object.

In your family tree example, a rel-tag crawler would find a rel-tag of
dead on the page and index it under the tagspace of 'dead'. This is
expected, perfectly valid, and correct behavior. Now, when you look to
a specific hCard searcher/spider, it will NOT apply rel-tag of 'dead'
to all the hCards on the page, ONLY to the ones where it has been
scoped (this is done my adding the rel-tag inside the class="vcard")
it will not mix-up things and assume you are dead.

Does that make sense?


brian suda

More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list