On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 9:42 AM, Martin McEvoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello all, > > @toby thank you for re-analysing the comment examples, you have done a good > job > > Here Is my proposal for a comment microformat. > > On the whole to mark up comment's it is possible to use hAtom terms the only > addition I would add is a rel-reply link. example and definition are as > follows > > example: <a rel="reply" href="http://someblog/post#comment-001";>link to > this</a> > > * reply[1] (comment-link) 60% > o By adding "rel-reply" the author is indicating that the page > http://someblog/post#comment-001 is a reply for the referring page (see > example). > 1. reply MAY be defined as rfc4685 section 3[2] in-reply-to atom > threading extension. > 2. A parser MAY use the referring page http://someblog/post as the value > of in-reply-to > > [1] http://microformats.org/wiki/comment-brainstorming#Proposal > [2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4685#section-3
This is semantic nonsense. See my previous comments and Toby's from last night, i.e. "this [parsing the URL] is a horrible idea" -- David Janes Mercenary Programmer http://code.davidjanes.com _______________________________________________ microformats-new mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
