Structured Blogging: Format-of-Formats?

From a post by Marc Canter to the Structured Blogging mailing list:

> This is one of the CORE issues I've been faced with - with my own
> 'structured blogging' efforts.
>
> We'll have some first pass ideas for CSS style sheets for each kind of post
> - so PLEASE feel free to make suggestions.
>
> That will be a core new function in the next 'Phase II' of SB.org.

And my two cents, as posted back to the mailing list:

It seems to me that we need to agree to a common microformat/structured blogging format definition language first. I don't care whether that's xml schema, rdf, xforms, etc... and I don't want to kick off an esoteric religious debate.

Once we define the way that we define a structured blogging format then each toolmaker can write one master structured blogging plugin. For example, if we settle on XML Schema then a single XML Schema file defines the structured blogging format for something (say, a Movie Review). WordPress, MT, Drupal, etc can then write a single plugin that accepts the XML Schema and displays it on screen for CRUD operations (Create Retrieve Update Delete).

And each of them can compete by providing additional extension points. For example, Reger.com may not allow CSS customization... but WordPress will... so WordPress will win over the users and the users will win from competition.

The display/editing of blog posts seems a separate concern from the format itself. Companies like PubSub/Technorati are going to be more interested in the definition language because it allows them to understand the markup their spiders are seeing.

SB clearly needs both pieces. It needs toolmaker flexibility to enable end-user simplicity. And it needs standardization of the format to describe formats so that aggregators can create social network effects across the blogosphere... i.e. so that we can all play together in format land.

The form elements that are used in browsers are generally the same. You've got dropdowns, check boxes, input boxes etc. Xforms and XUL are two technologies attempting to bridge the XML-to-UI gap and may be worth consideration.

SB, as a provider of open standards, has to decide what it offers as standards to encourage SB adoption. I propose that the work it's doing currently is to offer individual formats (Review Formats, People Formats, etc). This is incredibly important and fruitful work. But I also believe that SB should step a level higher to describe a format-of-formats... a standard way to describe something that's SB'd.

I don't believe that SB should step into the implementation technology side of things. For example, I don't think it'd be fruitful for SB to require a feature-complete Xforms implementation in an SB-approved blogging/publishing tool. As long as the tool allows the user to import files of the format-of-formats type, create blog posts and publish them in an SB-approved manner then it should be seen as compliant.

Tons of work is already happening along these lines in this group and in the microformats.org group... I know I'm preaching to the choir.

Back to Marc's comments. I agree with him. A one-size-fits-all CSS formatting for a format-of-formats won't give enough end-user flexibility. The format-of-formats CSS would allow you to style a dropdown, but would not allow you to define a kickass Album Review page layout with the cover pic in the middle and title in big honkin' blink tags (if you're so inclined).

But I think that a blended approach where the format-of-formats CSS covers the basics like how to get dropdowns on screen and then specialized CSS overrides/enhances presentation is ideal.

As you can tell, I'm trying to get to a point where the toolmakers don't have to hard-code anything in their system to support a basic new SB format. I'm interested in working on this format-of-formats but I need a lot of feedback from everybody here before I propose anything. I'm fairly technology-agnostic, but I know that each of us has preferences and technical barriers.

I certainly don't want to sidetrack any of the great work happening already. Maybe I'm discussing "Phase III" of SB.org?

Let me know what you think.

Best,

Joe

Update: I suppose I should RTFM every now and then. This is a great start in the right direction. Thanks to Kimbro Staken for the pointer to MicroCormat Definition (MCD).

Update: And apologies to the microformats.org mailing list where this topic is off-limits because it's difficult to solve while making everybody happy. There's a guy named Dr. Ernie Prabhakar who may be interested in taking this challenge on with me off-list... or maybe we should start a sub-list to respect Tantek's desire to not approach this issue. I just feel it's critical to the future growth of the movement.