reviews-formats: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (→REV) |
m (→REV) |
||
Line 152: | Line 152: | ||
==== REV ==== | ==== REV ==== | ||
* RDF Review Vocabulary: http://www.purl.org/stuff/rev | * RDF Review Vocabulary: http://www.purl.org/stuff/rev | ||
** Supposedly deployed in [http://trust.mindswap.org/FilmTrust/ FilmTrust] | ** Supposedly deployed in [http://trust.mindswap.org/FilmTrust/ FilmTrust]. Unable to verify by going to site. | ||
==== Simple-Review XML ==== | ==== Simple-Review XML ==== |
Revision as of 16:33, 26 June 2005
Current Reviews Formats
There have been several efforts to define data formats for posting "reviews" of products, services etc. on the Web.
This page serves to document the current list of review schemas, formats, and efforts as background for the design of a simple reviews MicroFormat. -Tantek
Centralized Implementations
Insider Pages
Customer reviews of local businesses
- author
- rating (0 - 5 stars)
- business name
- review title
- review
- pros
- cons
- business category
- business address
- business phone number
- business e-mail address
- business website
Amazon.com
- author
- publication date
- title
- description
- rating (0 to 5 stars)
- overall and by category
- declared value and a maximum possible value
- overall and by category
- vote for or against component
Mini-review
Mini reviews are limited to products on some areas of the site.
- rating (0 to 5 stars)
- ownership status ([x] I own this)
- negative interest ([x] Not interested)
Blogcritics
- author
- title
- publication date
- description
- reviewed work identifier
- reviewed work title
- reviewed work version
- release date
- Volume, issue
- edition
- translation
- reviewed work author(s)
- reviewed work publisher
Consumer Reviews
- reviewed item
- reviewed item version
- rating
- overall 1-100
- by category 1-5
- definition list of specifications
Epinions
- author
- publication date
- title
- summary ("the bottom line")
- description
- rating overall and by category
- positive summary
- negative summary
- cost
- vote for or against product
- vote for or against review
Web site or page reviews
Yahoo! Local
- author
- publication date
- title
- description
- rating
- overall and by category
- positive summary
- negative summary
Restaurant
- usage datetime
- specific use
Yelp
SF Survey
Zagat
- rating by category
- cost
- description
delicious 3rd party
- rating (0-100%)
- tags (keywords, year, user-specified others)
- artist/author
- title
- URL
- comments
- unique identifier
iTunes XML
- rating (0-100%)
review world
Dinner Buzz
Previous Schemas and Formats
Generic to any kind of review
RVW
- http://www.pmbrowser.info/rvw/0.2/
- http://hublog.hubmed.org/archives/000307.html <- this is a really old and out-of-date version
- http://www.pmbrowser.info/wiki.pl?RVW
- variants for embedding in Atom, RSS2, RSS1, RDF
- apparent schema
- author of review
- content of review
- creator of work
- example: book author, movie director
- percentage score rating
- multiple identifiers
- example: ISBN, ASIN, UPC, LOC
- link to purchase
- appears to be loosely connected with the term "!OpenReviews" (has also referred to other efforts) which itself appears to be yet another OpenBlahBlah buzzword with no substance behind it (AKA placeholder term).
REV
- RDF Review Vocabulary: http://www.purl.org/stuff/rev
- Supposedly deployed in FilmTrust. Unable to verify by going to site.
Simple-Review XML
- Embeds XML in <script type="application/x-subnode">
- XSD
- apparent schema
- review-title
- item
- name/title
- type
- URL
- image URL
- rating (user visible, max, normalized to 0..1 value)
- comments/description
For specific domains
Movies
Books
- RDF schema for book reviews: http://www.amk.ca/xml/reviews.html
Thoughts on a Microformat
Thoughts towards a simple MicroFormat subset of earlier efforts, sufficient to express 80/20.
Common review fields
- item
- optional:type of item (business, Web page/site, product, event, person, place, file, text)
- name/title of item being reviewed (string | ["hCard"] if business or person)
- optional:URL (all additional information should be somewhere else, not in the review itself)
- optional:image (URL)
- reviewer (["hCard"]|name|email|URL)
- review publication/authoring date (ISO8601 datetime)
- rating 1 to 5 (default max = 5, default min = 1)
- optional:tags (keyword,rating)*
- optional:comments (string)
See hReview for the result and evolution of these thoughts on a microformat.