You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
From indieweb-dev chat today, I found that validating a microformats1 hEntry post (example) can show some misleading messages. In this example, the original post has a microformats2 u-syndication class. php-mf2 and others won’t parse that since the specification directs to parse for backcompat classes.
The parsers don’t indicate if the result came from backcompat or not, so IWM is reporting that no syndication links were found in the post (example). This is definitely confusing for publishers, because the suggested markup does appear in the permalink. I don’t know the best way to do this, but ideally the validator should warn if backcompat was used and explain that a mixture of microformats2 classes won’t be found.
From indieweb-dev chat today, I found that validating a microformats1
hEntry
post (example) can show some misleading messages. In this example, the original post has a microformats2u-syndication
class. php-mf2 and others won’t parse that since the specification directs to parse for backcompat classes.The parsers don’t indicate if the result came from backcompat or not, so IWM is reporting that no syndication links were found in the post (example). This is definitely confusing for publishers, because the suggested markup does appear in the permalink. I don’t know the best way to do this, but ideally the validator should warn if backcompat was used and explain that a mixture of microformats2 classes won’t be found.
(Originally published at: https://gregorlove.com/2024/12/improve-validation-for-mf1-hentry/)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: