Comments on: Microformats and aggregation http://philwilson.org/blog/2005/06/microformats-and-aggregation a geek commodity Mon, 23 Jan 2012 20:27:23 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: Pip http://philwilson.org/blog/2005/06/microformats-and-aggregation/comment-page-1#comment-487 Pip Sun, 19 Jun 2005 22:57:00 +0000 http://philwilson.org/blog/2005/06/microformats-and-aggregation#comment-487 I knew someone would say that ;)<br/><br/>A review is not a single entity, it is made up of all those parts that hReview and RVW take into account. From the perspective of syndication (which is where I was coming from), the 'content' is the main review text. <br/><br/>Things like the rating, review type and so on should be stored separately, not in the same field as, the review body. I knew someone would say that ;)

A review is not a single entity, it is made up of all those parts that hReview and RVW take into account. From the perspective of syndication (which is where I was coming from), the ‘content’ is the main review text.

Things like the rating, review type and so on should be stored separately, not in the same field as, the review body.

]]> By: ryan king http://philwilson.org/blog/2005/06/microformats-and-aggregation/comment-page-1#comment-486 ryan king Sun, 19 Jun 2005 22:36:00 +0000 http://philwilson.org/blog/2005/06/microformats-and-aggregation#comment-486 You say: "so that I can aggregate and store data sensibly and separately from, but related to, the main content."<br/><br/>But the review is the content. There's no need to seperate parts of it from the others. You say: “so that I can aggregate and store data sensibly and separately from, but related to, the main content.”

But the review is the content. There’s no need to seperate parts of it from the others.

]]>