On Jan 3, 2007, at 3:10 PM, Nick Peters wrote:
Seeing the tag implementation on Operator has made me question the
existing tagging standard. With wordpress you may get something like
"?cat=13" for a tag or something that may not even be the intended tag
at all.
Yes, Wordpress abuses the rel="tag" spec by doing that, so I have had
to code round it at Technorati. They can't do proper url path tags on
all installs, but the code doesn't omit rel="tag" on the non-tag links.
http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-tag#Tag_Spaces says
Tags may only be placed in the URL path, and only in the last segment
of the path. Tags may not be placed in query parameters or fragment
identifiers. e.g.
http://technorati.com/tag/tech?tag=fish#emu
is still a URL for the tag "tech", not "fish" or "emu".
Actually, stripping parameters is recommended (that's why it says 'last
path segment'). a previous implementation bug of mine at Technorati
wasn't doing that properly.
After doing some research on the wiki I see that the
rel="tag" microformat is based off of existing defacto standards
(implemented by sites such as del.icio.us and flickr). I still don't
see why the standard extracts the tag from the last part of the URL
instead of the information inside the anchor tag. When I see a tag
and click on it, I expect the visible content, not what's appended to
the end of a URL. Anyone care to shed some light on this for me?
The 'last path component of URL' part was based on existing practice by
both del.icio.us and Flickr when we did the analysis. This was done to
encourage use of these kinds of tagspaces, rather than just allowing
linking to an arbitrary URL and using the link text. Setting up a
tagspace does take a modest amount of webserver configuration, granted.
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
