This is great feedback. Let me see if I can answer some of your questions.

First, the item type was deliberately limited to a very coarse set of values in order to avoid getting drawn into a huge taxonomy design problem.

To note that the item you are reviewing is a restaurant, or a movie, or a tv show, you would simply add the appropriate tags to the review. E.g. a review of a restaurant should include the tag “restaurant”. This makes a lot more sense, since the number of different kinds of things that could be reviewed is so numerous and varied, that tagging works better than an preset set of categories. Similarly if you wanted to distinguish reviewing a DVD vs. a VHS version of a movie, you would use the respective tag.

Second, the comment about multiple reviewers is interesting. Though it certainly seems like a possibility, I think that would only make sense in situations where the reviewers collaborated on the entire review, the description, the ratings, the tags etc. That’s atypical, as even in the example you give (Siskel and Ebert), they make different comments (description), and often have a different thumbs up vs. down (rating) as well. Thus such typical “multiple author reviews” are really multiple reviews of the same item.

I hope that helps answer some of the questions/issues you raised.

Please feel free to also add hReview questions to the FAQ at http://developers.technorati.com/wiki/hReviewFAQ and general feedback at http://developers.technorati.com/wiki/hReviewFeedback

Thanks,

Tantek