Hi,
I'm new to the whole microformats thing, so excuse me if I'm repeating
a question. fwiw I didn't find the answer in the FAQ.
I run an aggregator of blog posts about journal articles
(researchblogging.org). Technically these are all reviews, because the
blogger is offering her/his opinion about the article. But they're not
typical of the type of reviews the general public might be familiar
with (e.g. movies, restaurants). Generally a reviewer of a journal
article doesn't rate it on a star system -- simply by virtue of
discussing it a blogger is indicating the article is worthwhile.
That said, occasionally our users do take the opportunity to trash an
article. I'd expect if we actually used a star rating system all our
reviews would be either 0 or 5. But I see from the specs that star
ratings are optional.
We're more interested in using a microformat to give content tags to
a post -- is it about biochemistry or astrophysics? While it seems to
me that hReview can do this, perhaps some other microformat would be
better suited to our needs. We also considered xFolk, but that seems
even less relevant to our situation.
Any suggestions? Any reason we *shouldn't* be using hReview?
Thanks!
Dave
--
Dave Munger
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://researchblogging.org
http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedaily
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
