

Finally, semantic links for the girl i'm crushing on. what took so long? - clutchski
http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/RelExtensions

======
WalterGR
Very interesting.

Keyword = "crush" = brief description = "this person considers the referenced
person to be a crush (i.e. has a crush on the referenced person)"

Keyword = "date" = brief description = "this person considers the referenced
person to be a date (i.e. is dating the referenced person)"

I'd argue that considering a person to be " _a date_ " does not imply that one
is _dating_ that person.

Doctorow: "In meta-utopia, the lab-coated guardians of epistemology sit down
and rationally map out a hierarchy of ideas..."
<http://www.well.com/~doctorow/metacrap.htm>

~~~
ComputerGuru
I don't get it.. Maybe I'm just being a little slow, but how does the fact
that I consider I went out on a date with X not mean that I'm dating X?

~~~
TrevorJ
In the logical sense it does, however typically the term "dating" connotes a
commitment to the relationship that is a a bit deeper than simply going on a
single date. I think it's the modern equivalent of "going steady".

~~~
bravura
I would argue that "dating" means that we go on dates together (present tense
being important here). But a lot of people are "dating" before they have a
specific conversation about exclusitivity.

~~~
TrevorJ
That's the difference between the literal meaning of the word and the implied
meaning I think.

------
tyrmored
Where's "arch-nemesis"?

~~~
sethg
Not to mention "pointy-haired ex-boss".

~~~
krakensden
Don't you mean "fearless leader"?

------
vicaya
Had a little cognitive dissonance when I noticed that the status is "accepted"
for that attribute value.

~~~
steveklabnik
Maybe for a site like okcupid...

Okay, that's still a stretch.

------
three14
Could someone who has time to kill to go through the "Microformats Process"
please add the "parody" keyword? This would be a great help for the next time
xkcd wants to demonstrate the beauty of HTML5.

------
sethg
Clay Shirky had some acrid comments on this "semantic links to humans" idea
five years ago:

[http://many.corante.com/archives/2004/08/17/xfn_relationship...](http://many.corante.com/archives/2004/08/17/xfn_relationships.php)

One comment to that post remarked: "It seems to me that it's not just a
solution looking for a problem; it's a problem looking for a problem."

------
mfukar
OK, there's no 'hate', 'kill', 'restraining order'. Is Web 2.0 becoming too
goody-good for its own good?

~~~
TrevorJ
Orwell? The list is far from complete, I doubt those would be the first words
people would think to add, I'm sure word with negative connotations will be
added in the future.

~~~
chasingsparks
Double-plus good comment, TrevorJ.

------
shrikant
WordPress already has support for this, when you're editing your Blogroll
links (out of the box). Awesome.

------
axod
"Crushing on"? Never heard that expression before. "Have a crush on" is more
usual.

