Hi Chuck, Thanks for the insight. I'd love to see the drafts when they become available.
I'm curious, how do you envision describing common job posting artifacts like 'full-time', 'part-time', 'contract' using hListing? Darren On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 8:42 PM, Chuck Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Darren Bounds wrote: > > I represent Vurv and we definitely see value in defining a job > > requisition standard which may or may not leverage existing > > Microformats but could not be contained by hListing and hCard alone. > > > Darren, > > What you say is true, but I wonder if the reason it is true is that the > requisition use case isn't necessarily equivalent to the hJob or hListing > microformat use case. The latter is all about getting some > semantics/structure in a browser so content can be indexed/mashed-up, etc. I > think the > requisition use case is a bit different. > > In connection with the on-going HR-XML 3.0 re-architecture, our recruiting > work group did a bit of survey work and analysis of the "PositionOpening" > XML instances that came in under our certification program. We found a > tremendous variation in the fields used by implementers. This variation is by > industry, occupation, level of job, custom in the particular country or > region, etc. My point in mentioning this is that our recent research tends to > mirror some of the wide variation documented in the job-listing wiki pages: > http://microformats.org/wiki/job-listing-brainstorming > http://microformats.org/wiki/job-listing-examples > > This recent review leads me to believe that the simpler hListing is likely a > better path than the more richly descriptive hJob. If the Microformats > community were to build out everything under the job-listing brainstorming > page (something approaching what might be required in a requisition), you > might be adding complexity and opportunities for variation without > commensurate benefit. I think you'd have something closer to a "document > format" > than a "microformat". > > The HR-XML recruiting work group kicked off its latest round of work just > recently. This is still on-going, but the workgroup's current direction also > may be informative. They are looking at splitting the existing > PositionOpening spec into two different documents. One would be greatly > simplified and > primarily intended to communicate a formatted representation of a position > (even a Microformatted formatted representation) to an advertising venue or > recruiting partner. This responds to one usage pattern we saw a lot of -- > implementers using a thin bit of XML for the administrivia that trading > partners need to know about one another and for a bit of classification of > the position, but passing most of the real job content as HTML within a > CDATA section. The other document they are considering is a structured > PositionProfile. This would be designed for the back office > computer-to-computer provisioning of one system by another with very > structured, discretely fielded information describing the position. > > I hope some of the above makes sense. If there is interest, I can share > drafts of some of the above as they become available. > > Best Regards, > > Chuck Allen > HR-XML Consortium, Inc. > > _______________________________________________ > microformats-new mailing list > [email protected] > http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new > -- Thank you, Darren Bounds _______________________________________________ microformats-new mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
