- From: Eric J. Bowman <eric@bisonsystems.net>
- Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 23:50:55 -0600
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: Edward O'Connor <eoconnor@apple.com>, www-tag@w3.org
Julian Reschke wrote: > > > > >> I'd look for annotation on HTML that could provide it with Atom > >> semantics. It really wouldn't require much. > > > > Indeed: http://microformats.org/wiki/hatom > > Apparently written down ~3 years ago. Does anybody use that? Are > there aggregators understanding it? > You'll find hatom code on my demo, I believe it's much older than that, I think it's the wiki that's 3 years old. No, aggregators don't understand it, they tend to ignore text/html as a rule, while text/html bots give you everything they get, not some pared-down version subject to wide interpretation from site to site (which is hatom's problem, it requires its own non-trivial parser). What I actually use hatom for, is to standardize my CSS from one project to the next -- the styling for, say, .hfeed differs, but it's easy to tell what's being styled just by looking at my selectors. Real godsend for maintenance, but useless otherwise except for a couple of plugin doo-dads which can recognize it and do stuff on Ffx, if they're even maintained anymore. It was my experience with the uber-hacky hatom which led me to RDFa, and I did work up a preliminary RDFa vocabulary for Atom feeds and entries, which I still think is the way to go; also works for CSS but the selectors get uglier. When a <form> is marked up this way, the markup is machine-readable in that this text box changes the atom:title for this atom:id. RDFa parses any vocabulary, makes Atom-as-RDFa easy to work with. But, not as a replacement for Atom. As I see it, the whole point of a feed is to strip out all the presentational cruft (aside from, like, bulleted lists) and surround the user-generated content with the relevant metadata -- who posted what to whom when and in relation to which posts and topics -- in a standardized fashion. Especially as threads grow, leaving out all that redundant, per- comment presentational markup and forms saves considerable bytes over any HTML presentation, to the point where it doesn't make any sense for HTML to do double-duty with embedded Atom, at least not for feed aggregators. It does make sense from a maintenance and machine- readability perspective, say m2m via annotated HTML forms. Also to simplify system output, but I do this by caching all that redundant HTML in XSLT to be generated on the user-agent; this way has as much positive effect on cache-hit ratios as embedding Atom in HTML (doesn't matter if the hit is for the presentation or the feed, it's the same entity), minus the bandwidth hit, with the added complexity of a single XSLT stylesheet, no big whoop. -Eric
Received on Tuesday, 26 March 2013 05:51:09 UTC