On Mar 7, 2007, at 1:51 AM, Danny Ayers wrote:
There I disagree - as far as the theory goes, for microformats the
problem is effectively solved.
The notion of profile URIs has gone through the community process, and
there's even a microformat to support them: XMDP. It's been accepted
that each microformat should have a profile URI [1].
Agreed.
The remaining problem is that it's not possible to both follow good
practice in regard to web architecture *and* respect the convention
side of microformats. If I want to use a profile URI for hReview my
only option right now is to make up one of my own. This is legitimate
in terms of web architecture, but may lead to mutliple equivalent
profiles making the tool developer's job that much harder.
If you make up an XMDP profile, I'm sure we can put it on
microformats.org so there is a blessed one.
Just to reiterate the rationale for profile URIs : if publishers
include one, they have made a clear assertion according to the
conventions of web architecture and the relevant specs that they're
using that microformat. Consumer tools which maximally respect the
intent of the publisher will check for profile URIs and proceed
accordingly. Ideally a clear distinction will be made between data
that has been extracted following the chain of authority and that
which is the result of scraping/assumptions by the scraping tool. This
certainly doesn't rule out the case of simple scraping & display, for
many purposes that's perfectly adequate. But it's ludicrous that the
webarch-friendly option isn't currently available.
So, help make it so. We could declare an official URL and put your
soupdragon there, which would satisfy the opaque URL you want, but if
you made up an XMDP, that would be far better.
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
