6. » 2004: Mark Birbeck (W3C)
» Part of XHTML 2.0
» RDF in HTML attributes = RDFa
» Attributes used: about, src, rel, rev, href,
resource, property, content, datatype,
typeof
» Pros
˃ Publisher Independence
˃ Self Containment: HTML | RDFa
» Cons
˃ XML based
˃ There is not a ‘standards body’ for formats
˃ A bit complex
7. - div:
- standard namespace
- item being coded
- span: title
- span: author
- span: date
8. » 2007: Tantek Çelik, Dan Cederholm
» ‘Support’ for both XHTML/HTML
» Attributes used: class, rel, rev, id
» Pros
˃ Simplicity
» Cons
˃ Short list of elements (9 stable)
˃ Likes IDs!
˃ Accesibility issues
http://bbc.co.uk/blogs/radiolabs/2008/06/removin
g_microformats_from_bbc.shtml
9. - div:
- div: first name
- div: organization name
- div: telephone number
- a: url
11. » Part of the HTML5 spec
» Delimited set of attributes: itemscope,
itemtype, itemprop, itemref
» Similar to RDFa’s take
» Pros
˃ Publisher Independence
˃ Self Containment: HTML
˃ Attribute based
˃ Easy to implement
» Cons
˃ Each site can use it’s own standards
12. » Google, Bing and Yahoo!
» Uses HTML5 spec
» Wide range of schemas (611 as of 10/11’)
» Easily Nestable
» Thing based
13. - div scope:movie
- h1: name
- div: director / scope:person
- span: name
- span: birthDate
- span: genre
- a: trailer
21. » Header: 4 | global
» Content: 12
» Footer: 3 | global
» Total: 19
22. » how deep?
˃ “more is better, except for hidden text”
» missing/implicit information?
˃ “meta tag it”
» working with dates
˃ use the html5 tag <time>
» can an itemprop be also a itemscope?
˃ hell yeah
