Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cooklang – Recipe Markup Language

cooklang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 112 posts

Re: Cooklang – Recipe Markup Language

#81

Post by scary-size »

thebricklayr wrote: post #38
scrps wrote: post #33

A feature I think would be helpful would be a reverse shopping list (for lack of a better term) where you can say 'I have ingredients a, b, c... list what recipes do I have all or ≥ n% the ingredients for?' I shall poke around the cli code.

I just added multi-ingredient keyword search across all of your recipes to Umami ( https://www.umami.recipes ). If you’re on iOS, I’d recommend checking it out!

Looks promising! I’ll give it a thorough test. Been working on my own recipe clean up tool [1]. Does your app all the scraping and parsing on the client side?

[1] https://pretty-recip.es/

Re: Cooklang – Recipe Markup Language

#82

Post by jkellermann »

Sounds interesting!

Some years ago, I came across a recepie as flowchart graph. This idea appealed to me instantaneously, because a picture to me is a thousand times better than a lettersoup. Especially when I'm not constantly reading the text, but have to check the pots and pans regularly.

I think this markup language could be used as input for an engine that generates nice recepie graphs.

And then an integration into the tandori.dev application?

Re: Cooklang – Recipe Markup Language

#83

Post by roel_v »

duped wrote: post #4

> Slowly add @milk{4%cup} [- TODO change units to litres -], keep mixing No! Handle units! @milk{4%cup} should be trivially convertible to liters and configured by the user. For harder conversions (volume to mass) keeping a list of ingredients and their densities (configurable of course) would be extremely useful. On that subject, being able to specify a recipe in terms of ratios and then automatically convert it to…

"No! Handle units! @milk{4%cup} should be trivially convertible to liters"

No! That's silly and it's not how cooking works! This way you get stupid recipes like on American cooking Youtube channels that just run their volumetric measurements through a converter and end up with recipes that call for 234 grams of flour, 13.5 grams of this or that spice and 78 ml of whatever. Recipes are (well, should be) tuned to the measurement system they use, and packaging availability in the area it targets, so that you get recipes that use e.g. 400ml of coconut milk (because that's the most common can size around here), whole numbers in amounts of ingredients etc. Converting between units in cooking and baking is not simply using a unit conversion calculator on your phone!

(and that's not even mentioning that there are UK, Australian and US cups, tablespoons and teaspoons)

Re: Cooklang – Recipe Markup Language

#84

Post by soperj »

tasuki wrote: post #62
soperj wrote: post #44

I actually made a webapp[0] that does a lot of this, but the it's markdown instead of it's own markup language. Benefit of it being online instead of having to run a local server is that you can use other people's recipes (or fork them if you want to alter them). There's also a drag and drop interface for weekly meal planning that makes your grocery list for you instead of having to write them out. [0] - www.reciped.…

I like the look but it's extremely unpolished (yet). Work in progress? The search is spartan at best and I could not find a list of all the recipes. Hamburger menu leads to a links page which is empty. I quickly gave up.

Empty? I can't duplicate that for the life of me. There should be a register and login link, or more if you're logged in. A list of recipes would be completely overwhelming way to browse if you're actually looking for something, you can search by any ingredient and get a list of recipes.

It's definitely something I'm still working on, but has been very usable.

Re: Cooklang – Recipe Markup Language

#85

Post by guhidalg »

mcdonje wrote: post #74
guhidalg wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hello! My website CookTime handles recipes with sections (I call them components). Check out this macaron recipe: https://letscooktime.com/Recipes/Details?id=8a67c391-ddcc-4d... The benefits are that you get distinct ingredient lists for each component but they get aggregated when you create a grocery list. Check out the discussion from last year here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31201528

Thanks. I can't figure out how to look at the markdown. I made an account figuring that'd let me edit (so I can view), but the protections apparently have another level. So, are the components different files? That'd definitely help if there's a component that applies to several recipes, like a sauce or crust. However, it could make things more complicated than some would like if they're working on a smaller project,…

> I made an account figuring that'd let me edit (so I can view), but the protections apparently have another level.

Thanks for making an account! You can only edit you own recipes, but I (the admin) can edit any recipe. I guess you tried to edit a recipe you liked, would you like a "Copy and Edit Recipe" feature?

> So, are the components different files?

Components are what CookTime recipes are made of. A recipe has at least one component, and if necessary the author can add additional components to indicate different ingredient quantities for different components. I have thought about having re-usable components across recipes, I just haven't given thought to how to design the UX for it. Glad to hear that someone else would find it useful, I think I'll reprioritize this.

> I can't figure out how to look at the markdown.

In CookTime there isn't a simple textual representation of a recipe (unless you count the big JSON object the browser sends over the wire.). The backend is a relational database of recipes, components, ingredient requirements, nutrition data, etc...

> Power vs simplicity is often a balancing act.

100%, my primary user is my mother-in-law and I have to be extra careful to make everything easy to use for an enthusiastic retiree.

Re: Cooklang – Recipe Markup Language

#86

Post by tasuki »

soperj wrote: post #84
tasuki wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like the look but it's extremely unpolished (yet). Work in progress? The search is spartan at best and I could not find a list of all the recipes. Hamburger menu leads to a links page which is empty. I quickly gave up.

Empty? I can't duplicate that for the life of me. There should be a register and login link, or more if you're logged in. A list of recipes would be completely overwhelming way to browse if you're actually looking for something, you can search by any ingredient and get a list of recipes. It's definitely something I'm still working on, but has been very usable.

> Empty? I can't duplicate that for the life of me.

My bad. Yes there's the register and login links. I guess I was taken off guard by the hamburger menu redirecting to https://www.reciped.io/links/ and showing the links there.

> A list of recipes would be completely overwhelming

Well it would be a good way to see how many recipes there are.

https://www.reciped.io/search/?search=flour currently lists 4 recipes and 2 ingredients. That, is not very many recipes requiring flour?

https://www.reciped.io/search/?search=egg lists 3 recipes.

https://www.reciped.io/search/?search=salt shows 12 recipes, leading me to think you have... hmm... maybe about 20 recipes total? Not my idea of overwhelming.

---

I mean, I could register, sure. But it's not even clear to me why I'd want to:

- If I want to find interesting new recipes, I don't have to register.

- If I want to keep track of my recipes, so that I can make it them the same way the next time, I don't want to register and record my recipes on your website, because now anyone can alter them.

---

I like the website overall! It's minimalistic, no bloat. And I like how you include the nutrition information!

Re: Cooklang – Recipe Markup Language

#87

Post by guhidalg »

detourdog wrote: post #77
guhidalg wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hello! My website CookTime handles recipes with sections (I call them components). Check out this macaron recipe: https://letscooktime.com/Recipes/Details?id=8a67c391-ddcc-4d... The benefits are that you get distinct ingredient lists for each component but they get aggregated when you create a grocery list. Check out the discussion from last year here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31201528

Since you seem to know this space. I'm interested in something people must be working on. I want something that is ingredient property oriented. Examples would be starch, antihistamine, and cultural usage. The idea would be a recipe generator the uses taste profiles, food textures, but has no standard ingredients. If one only had taro root for flour all recipes would sub that in...

I'm not aware of a specific service to do what you're describing. The closest I can think of is IBM's Watson demo for recipe creation[1].

Can you tell me more about what you're looking for? CookTime's recipe object modeling is very flexible, maybe I can make what you're looking for in a generic way.

[1] - https://researcher.watson.ibm.com/researcher/view_group.php?...

Re: Cooklang – Recipe Markup Language

#88

Post by guhidalg »

alustig3 wrote: post #56
duped wrote: post #4

> Slowly add @milk{4%cup} [- TODO change units to litres -], keep mixing No! Handle units! @milk{4%cup} should be trivially convertible to liters and configured by the user. For harder conversions (volume to mass) keeping a list of ingredients and their densities (configurable of course) would be extremely useful. On that subject, being able to specify a recipe in terms of ratios and then automatically convert it to…

sounds like a job for Unitron :) https://github.com/alustig3/unitron

Love this. I would buy this if it was IP-whatever waterproof rated so I can periodically wash off the oils and flours that _will_ get caked on this thing.

If this thing was paired with a mass scale at 1g accuracy with a dynamic range of like 0 to 5kg, I would pay like $50 for this.

Re: Cooklang – Recipe Markup Language

#89

Post by thebricklayr »

scary-size wrote: post #81
thebricklayr wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just added multi-ingredient keyword search across all of your recipes to Umami ( https://www.umami.recipes ). If you’re on iOS, I’d recommend checking it out!

Looks promising! I’ll give it a thorough test. Been working on my own recipe clean up tool [1]. Does your app all the scraping and parsing on the client side? [1] https://pretty-recip.es/

Wow, this is awesome! Your layout, subtle dividers, and serifed font really come together perfectly.

At the moment, Umami's scraping is done server-side. I'd really like to speed it up, so I'm going to start working on a 100% client scraper soon (for the native apps & browser extensions; the web version will always have cross-domain browser restrictions though).

Re: Cooklang – Recipe Markup Language

#90

Post by mcdonje »

alkonaut wrote: post #76
mcdonje wrote: post #10

Putting ingredients inline is interesting. I think I actually see the sense in it. As a reader, I want the ingredients list at the top, but as a writer, I'll think about ingredients as I write the instructions. So, doing it this way potentially saves on jumping back and forth between the instructions and the list, which almost feels like boilerplate. However, if you want to make shopping list annotations, then you're…

If you have them inline, you may or may not want them separately as well. The benefit of the separate listing is that it's the total amount required. Inline, you might have 1 egg being added first, and one egg being added last. Sure, since it's markup you could sum them to two eggs in an auto generated ingredient list, but for a general text format recipe, I'd like to see the egg in 3 places. In the ingredient list i…

I agree with that, but if there is an ingredient used in multiple components, then that should be handled separately so you know you need 200g flour for the crust and 100g for the crumble topping. The shopping list or overall ingredient list needs to know you need 300g, but the ingredients list for each component needs to know what you need just for that component so you don't accidentally throw 300g flour into the crumble.

So, I think the primary disconnect I had was that I thought this was a spec for a recipe, but it's actually a spec for a component of a recipe, or an entire recipe that only has one component. The CookTime person replied to me and showed how the spec can be used in a component paradigm, which makes it much more usable.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36501915

Post reply on HN