Re: Vote on this: rel="me self" to indicate an authoritative hCard {was: Re: Authorit

On 31 Jan 2007, at 17:24, Ara Pehlivanian wrote:
> Ben,
>
> Don't you think he has a point though? If you think of
it, rel="me"
> could suffice in that it refers to yourself at another
URL (in line
> with the idea of an authoritative hCard) and once you
get there and
> read that hCard and discover that it doesn't contain a
rel="me", you
> know you're at the authoritative card. In that sense,
why add "self"?
> Or am I now missing something?

The authoratitive hcard will also contain rel="me". Firstly, to  
fulfil XFN it must link back to the linking resource and as
a full  
hCard it will still contain URLs with rel="me" pointing
to the other  
sites I own.

rel=me indicates that the URL on the end of it
belongs to the same  
person
rel=self is adopted from the definition of self in
Atom. Quoting  
John Allsopp: The "definition" of the self
attribute value in Atom is  
"self: the feed itself".

My understanding therefore, is that rel=me indicates that it is
the  
same person. rel=self indicates that it is the same
hcard. Therefore  
the absolute authoritative hcard we speak of may (I expect
will)  
contain other links with rel=me but will not contain
a link with  
rel=self.

Ben
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On 1/31/07, Ben Ward <listsben-ward.co.uk> wrote:
> The authoratitive hcard will also contain rel="me". Firstly, to
> fulfil XFN it must link back to the linking resource
and as a full
> hCard it will still contain URLs with rel="me" pointing to the other
> sites I own.

Hang on, linking /back/ to the referring hCard would be
unmanageable
for several reasons, not the least of which that you may not
even be
aware of all the hCards linking ot you. As well as the fact
that you
might have a hundred reciprocal links as a part of your
authoritative
hCard. That makes no sense.

> rel=me indicates that the URL on the end of it
belongs to the same
> person
> rel=self is adopted from the definition of self in
Atom. Quoting
> John Allsopp: The "definition" of the self
attribute value in Atom is
> "self: the feed itself".

Okay, that rel="self" part makes sense.
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On Jan 31, 2007, at 9:47 AM, Ben Ward wrote:

> My understanding therefore, is that rel=me
indicates that it is the  
> same person. rel=self indicates that it is the same
hcard.  
> Therefore the absolute authoritative hcard we speak of
may (I expect  
> will) contain other links with rel=me but will not contain
a link  
> with rel=self.

This is what I understood.

 From here on, is a braindump:

I'm still unsure of the original objection, which seems to
be that  
rel=me must be symmetric. XFN does not have the
concept of one of  
those pages being more authoritative than the other, right?
If we have  
the following page structure (bare minimum markup included
for brevity):

Document A:
<a href="B" rel="me"></a>

Document B:
<a href="A" rel="me"></a>

to XFN, both pages are equally "authoritative," in
that they represent  
the same author. XFN doesn't seem to care much about which
one is  
"more authoritative" than the other, just that
they are referring to  
the same person, and that's fine.

Adding rel=self is a proposed way of breaking this loop, and
letting  
one settle as the authority:

Document A:
<a href="A" rel="me
self"></a>

Docment B:
<a href="A" rel="me"></a>

I think that would be the use case (judging by what Chris
Messina  
posted)?

The problem there seems that A no longer tells us anything
about  
wether or not it recognizes B as another, valid source of
information.  
Simply adding another URL with rel=me doesn't seem like it
would work  
though -- then the following case could occur:

Document A:
<a href="A" rel="me
self"></a>
<a href="B" rel="me"></a>

Document B:
<a href="B" rel="me
self"></a>
<a href="A" rel="me"></a>

In which both A and B claim authority, and both link to each
other as  
"slaves", which leaves a parser in a strange
situation -- now you  
don't just have two pages claiming to represent one person,
but two  
pages claiming to be the authoritative source for one
person. This  
doesn't seem like it would make a whole lot of sense.

end braindump.

Is this (one of) the issues being discussed? I'm basing a
lot of this  
on Chris Messina's email to the thread, which was a bit
unclear.

If so, I wrote a second part to this (attempting to solve
that  
problem), but decided to save it until I know wether or not
I even  
have my assumptions in order.
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss