On 28 Mar 2007, at 23:17, Kake L Pugh wrote:
On Wed 28 Mar 2007, Bob Walker bob@randomness.org.uk wrote:
We have discussed before that we prefer categories and locales over "tags" becasue they are less freeform. However they are our "tags" and as such we should probably mark them up like that for microformat goodness. It would seem the way to do this is to add rel="tag" in the <a>.
Bob pointed me at http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-tag
for further info, and it looks like it isn't this simple. The only way they allow you to state what the tag actually _is_ (e.g. "pub", "bermondsey") is to have it as the final "component" of the URL that you link to. Having it as a query parameter is no use. Having it as an additional attribute of the <a> element is no use. Having it as some non-final component of the URL in order to be compatible with some other scheme that also wants to have its data as the final component of the URL is no use.
So basically - we can't do this as it stands, and even if we did decide to rewrite all our URLs to fit in with it, we'd be locking ourselves into a particular URL scheme which may well be incompatible with the next cool thing to come along.
It feels rather like something that hasn't been properly thought out yet, particularly given the valid and recent criticisms raised at http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-tag-feedback
Also, one might prefer RDFa or GRDDL to achieve similar goals.
I'm not expert enough to recommend one over the other, however GRDDL does seem to be dynamic enough that it might be a low-hanging fruit to grab for Open Guides.
Of course Open Guides already outputs actual RDF/XML, so some might argue this whole exercise is somewhat redundant.
Daniel