David Janes wrote:
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 4:33 PM, Toby A Inkster <mail at
tobyinkster.co.uk> wrote:
> David Janes wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure why you think #3 forces a particular layout.
>
> Imagine the following comments:
>
> - Comment A to the main article at 1:00 pm.
> - Comment B to the main article at 2:00 pm.
> - Comment C in reply to comment A at 3:00 pm.
> - Comment D in reply to comment B at 4:00 pm.
>
> Use of class="hfeed replies" forces the comments to be placed in
ACBD order:
> C is a reply to A so it needs to be nested within a feed nested
within A; B
> cannot come between them. This means that the comments cannot be
layed out
> chronologically.
Sorry, I don't see this .... You can put
<EntryComments>...<EntryComments> around comments, independent of
ordering or nesting. To spell it out explicitly, e.g. and assuming
EntryComments is physicalized using "hfeed comments"
<div class="hentry">
... this is the blog post ...
<div class="hfeed comments">
<div class="hentry">
<p class="entry-content">A</p>
<abbr title="..." class="updated">1:00 pm</abbr>
</div>
<div class="hentry">
<p class="entry-content">B</p>
<abbr title="..." class="updated">2:00 pm</abbr>
</div>
<div class="hentry">
<p class="entry-content">C</p>
<abbr title="..." class="updated">3:00 pm</abbr>
</div>
<div class="hentry">
<p class="entry-content">D</p>
<abbr title="..." class="updated">4:00 pm</abbr>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Now the problem is: how do we explicitly markup that C is a reply to
A, and D is a reply to B? Without taking them out of chronological
order! That is the use case for rel="in-reply-to".
That's why I suggest allowing both class="hfeed replies" and rel="in-
reply-to". The former takes care of the most simple case, but the
latter is required for more complex threading.
--
Toby A Inkster
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
_______________________________________________
microformats-new mailing list
microformats-new@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
