On Nov 14, 2006, at 3:57 PM, Jeremy Boggs wrote:
On Nov 14, 2006, at 3:04 PM, Scott Reynen wrote:
I'd say it's not a use case at all, as no on has really described
how this markup would be used by parsing applications.
Does the "it's" to which you're referring, Scott, mean hCite for a
reviewed book in general, or marking up page numbers specifically?
Neither. I was referring only to page count (which is different than
page numbers).
I'm starting to see that page count might be out scope, but I'm
still open to it.
I'm certainly open to it too. I'd just like to see some reason for
including additional markup, some way it actually helps us do
anything, so we're not just adding markup for markup's sake.
What exactly would we gain from this markup in terms of
functionality?
If you're referring to my question about page numbers, perhaps
nothing. I'm totally fine with leaving it blank, or not including
it within hCitation; I point out reviews as another example of how
they're used, so the community could consider it. I only want to
make sure that, if in fact page count is out of scope, do we simple
ignore it in the markup?
Yes. Nearly every type of microformat published in the wild contains
content that isn't part of the microformat's purpose. Parsers just
ignore this unrelated content. But it can still be intermingled in
the HTML.
My understanding of why page counts exist in book review
bibliographic information is that it is a legacy from older
problems with knowing which book is the "right" book, or the book
your referring to; I might refer to a version that has, say, 438
pages, but there might be another print run that had, for various
reasons, 420 pages. This is so much a problem anymore, so maybe it
isn't a problem for hCite.
If that were a common problem I think it would be a compelling reason
to include page counts. But if it's just an edge case, hCite can
still be useful to the 80% (or more) cases where page count is
irrelevant, and people can still read the page count where it's
relevant even if machines can't.
If it's in a review and it's describing the item you're reviewing,
I'd say it belongs in hReview's description field.
I completely agree. From my understanding, that information
included inside the DESCRIPTION field in hReview could be marked up
with hCitation. hReview isn't, however, listed in the "Modularity"
section of the citation page, though I imagine it could be.[1]
Is there a reason why hCite could not be used in a book review
marked up in hReview?
I don't see any. You have to cite a book before you can review it,
right?
If there is a need to describe page count more specifically, I'm
still not clear what it is. Searching books by page count?
If marking up content to make it searchable is the primary purpose
of hCitation, then I'd agree that page count is out of scope.
That was just a question, not an attempt to declare the scope of hCite.
Peace,
Scott
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
