After reading through and looking at the examples, something about the class="rel-*" doesn't seem right. Why not do something like: Ryan had some <cite> <a href="http://theryanking.com/blog/?post=1"; rel="reply"> additional ideas </a> </cite> about the format.
This would just move it to a complex microformat instead of a simple one. hCa* does something similar when creating nested relationship such as class="adr" etc. Maybe there is a reason why you chose not to use Rel/Rev attributes, but instead created class names with them instead? to me it seems that if there is a n attribute built-in to the spec, that should get used? I realise this forces you to use 'a' elements -brian Eran wrote: > > Hi All. > > I just posted to the wiki draft versions of the cite-rel spec and XMDP > profile. > > The spec is here: http://microformats.org/wiki/cite-rel > > The profile is here: http://microformats.org/wiki/cite-rel-profile > > If you want to catch up on the discussion leading up to this point, > take a look at the brainstorming page at > http://microformats.org/wiki/distributed-conversation-brainstorming > > The general purpose of cite-rel is tracking distributed conversations > (mostly in blog posts but not exclusively). This Microformat allows > authors to indicate relationships between their post and other posts > anywhere on the Internet. Please take a look at the current drafts, > we’re looking for as much feedback as possible. If you’re interested > in the topic, please jump in the discussion, we’d love to hear from you. > > Thanks, > > Eran Globen. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > microformats-discuss mailing list > microformats-discuss@microformats.org > http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss > _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
