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