Using the hReview microformat for journal article reviews

Hi,

I'm new to the whole microformats thing, so excuse me if I'm
repeating  
a question. fwiw I didn't find the answer in the FAQ.

I run an aggregator of blog posts about journal articles  
(researchblogging.org). Technically these are all reviews,
because the  
blogger is offering her/his opinion about the article. But
they're not  
typical of the type of reviews the general public might be
familiar  
with (e.g. movies, restaurants). Generally a reviewer of a
journal  
article doesn't rate it on a star system -- simply by virtue
of  
discussing it a blogger is indicating the article is
worthwhile.

That said, occasionally our users do take the opportunity to
trash an  
article. I'd expect if we actually used a star rating system
all our  
reviews would be either 0 or 5. But I see from the specs
that star  
ratings are optional.

We're more interested in using  a microformat to give
content tags to  
a post -- is it about biochemistry or astrophysics? While it
seems to  
me that hReview can do this, perhaps some other microformat
would be  
better suited to our needs. We also considered xFolk, but
that seems  
even less relevant to our situation.

Any suggestions? Any reason we *shouldn't* be using
hReview?

Thanks!

Dave


--
Dave Munger
dsmungergmail.com

http://researchblogging.o
rg
http://science
blogs.com/cognitivedaily





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

Hi Dave -
I (also new in this MF-business) would consider this
application of hReview
very useful. I am thinking about how to use hReview in the
context of
Peer-Reviewing in e-learning settings, what would be quite
familiar...

As far as I can see, you have optional TAGs in hReview
(http://microform
ats.org/wiki/hreview).
I suppose, what might be usful for your context would be an
extension of the
item type, eg "publication".

So long,
martin




On 15.05.2008 22:48 Uhr, "Dave Munger"
<dsmungergmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I'm new to the whole microformats thing, so excuse me
if I'm repeating
> a question. fwiw I didn't find the answer in the FAQ.
> 
> I run an aggregator of blog posts about journal
articles
> (researchblogging.org). Technically these are all
reviews, because the
> blogger is offering her/his opinion about the article.
But they're not
> typical of the type of reviews the general public might
be familiar
> with (e.g. movies, restaurants). Generally a reviewer
of a journal
> article doesn't rate it on a star system -- simply by
virtue of
> discussing it a blogger is indicating the article is
worthwhile.
> 
> That said, occasionally our users do take the
opportunity to trash an
> article. I'd expect if we actually used a star rating
system all our
> reviews would be either 0 or 5. But I see from the
specs that star
> ratings are optional.
> 
> We're more interested in using  a microformat to give
content tags to
> a post -- is it about biochemistry or astrophysics?
While it seems to
> me that hReview can do this, perhaps some other
microformat would be
> better suited to our needs. We also considered xFolk,
but that seems
> even less relevant to our situation.
> 
> Any suggestions? Any reason we *shouldn't* be using
hReview?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
> --
> Dave Munger
> dsmungergmail.com
> 
> http://researchblogging.o
rg
> http://science
blogs.com/cognitivedaily
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> microformats-discuss mailing list
> microformats-discussmicroformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss


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