Ryan King wrote:
On Dec 4, 2005, at 9:15 AM, David Janes -- BlogMatrix wrote:
Ryan King wrote:
4. Why do we prefer <h#> over class="title" for entry titles?
See my earlier note. I'd really appreciate if you or Tantek got back
to me here: my understanding is that we'd always prefer appropriate
XHTML constructs.
Yes, I'd say we should prefer the appropriate html construct.
In this particular case, though, I'm afraid using <h#> is a bit brittle-
this is coming from helping triage support requests coming into
Technorati about us not indexing their blog properly. For this
particular element I would prefer:
1. an explicit classname (most people are using a classname already, no?)
2. fallback to <h#>
I think the explicit declaration should be preferred, but this is just a
suggestion. I know that other xhtml-syndication efforts have used <h#>
for entry titles, but I'm not sure of their success. Anyone with
experience here, please speak up.
I'm going to go with your suggestion. I've actually been doing lots of
playing with parsing Microformats using Python, DOMs, and so forth and
I'm getting a better sense of what practically works.
5. "Entry Permalinks MUST be absolute URIs". Why? We have well
established rules for relative urls.
I could lower this to SHOULD; feedback would be appreciated.
I think requiring absolute URIs is a bit too high a hurdle, not not
quite neccessary.
I'm going to change this to SHOULD. There, done.
However, what I'm trying to accomplish is to let "rel-bookmark"
provide byte comparable strings for providing "the best location for
this resource".
Like I said, the rules for transforming relative URIs to absolute ones
are pretty well established, so any consumer should be able to take care
of this for themselves. I think this is just a case where we need to
optimize for the publisher over the consumer.
I was reading a blog post yesterday about how much misery atom:base and
relative URIs are causing. Can't find it, ah well.
The problem with relative URIs is that readers at
"http://instapundit.com"; and at "http://www.instapundit.com"; will come
up with two different sets of Entry Permalinks that are actually
representing the same resources.
This even gets uglier with LiveJournal. I do recognize this may be an
attempt at some mild social engineering on my part.
FWIW, there has been some (offline and on-) discussion about a
rel-canonical microformat. Maybe hAtom should defer this problem (*it
is* bigger than just atom/blogs).
Fair enough. Maybe it'll be a role model.
6. quote:
there can be at most 1 Entry in an XHTML document without an Entry
Permalink; the Entry Permalink of this Entry is the URI of the page
This rule is needed for media pages (i.e. a news article on
cnn.com). There is some ugliness of with this because the URI could
be non-canonical."
I'm not sure I follow this and don't see anything on the
brainstorming page about it.
It's in the blog-post-examples [1]. I'd like to make in practical for
organizations such as CNN to markup pages such as [2] in hAtom without
requiring them rewriting the way they do pages.
So the use-case is a "document with one entry"? Is this really worth
making a general rule about?
...
It's all great -- bring it on. I'm back in fighting shape :-)
Great.
A few more changes have gone in. I've documented a list [1] for people
tracking the proposal. I've also started collecting practical advice on
templates, CSS and so forth [2]. Contributions from WP people and so
forth would be appreciated.
-ryan
Regards, etc...
David
http://www.blogmatrix.com
[1] http://microformats.org/wiki/hatom#Recent_Changes
[2] http://microformats.org/wiki/hatom#Hints_and_Tips
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
