On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:46:17 +0200, Peter Van Dijck
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let me know if you have any questions.
No questions, only praise. Great addition to mefeedia, Peter!
--
Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
URL: http://www.solitude.dk/
Commentary on media, communication, culture and
Would you guys like me to run it even farther back in time until 2004
so all your tags get caught? I only ran it back to December 2005..
Where a lot of you using tags in your posts?
Peter
On 4/18/06, Andreas Haugstrup [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:46:17 +0200, Peter Van Dijck
No, we don't support the category element yet. Two reasons:
1) I think it's philosophically the wrong approach, and
2) It's another day of coding and I don't have time right now, gotta
finish some consulting work :)
Not to say we won't, if I find some time I might implement that.
Cheers!
Peter
ah ok. I may rework how I do most of my tags one day although not today for the same reason #2 you gave. :-) I only did it that way because for a while Technorati really strongly pushed that method. It's still listed as their #1 way to tag items, although they seem to have moved more fully into
I think you're right, we need a tag extension. But the problem then
is: how many people use it? I usually just go with whatever has the
broadest support...
Peter
On 4/18/06, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ah ok. I may rework how I do most of my tags one day although not today
for the
Hello Peter,On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, we don't support the category element yet. Two reasons:1) I think it's philosophically the wrong approach, andJust out of curiosity, why is it philosophically the wrong approach to use the RSS category element?
See ya2) It's
Nice! Thanks, Peter...You just improved the vlogosphere :)sullOn 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Hi all,From today, Mefeedia supports the rel=tag standard.
This means that you can put tags in your blogpost, and your video willbe tagged automatically at Mefeedia. No more having
On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Peter,On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just out of curiosity, why is it philosophically the wrong approach to use the RSS category element?Because a category is not the same as a tag.. Tags are
Yeah they arent really the same thing. All the ways they are different hit you when you try to code around them. I've treated them mostly the same on my site, but have found myself very limited at times because of it. I've often wished I'd written my system differently so that it made clear
Hello,On 4/18/06, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah they arent really the same thing. All the ways they are different hit you when you try to code around them. I've treated them mostly the same on my site, but have found myself very limited at times because of it. I've often wished
perhaps but doesnt HREF actuall mean hypertext reference ... this wouldnt be a html doc, and would have to point to one (maybe it points to anohter xml doc)URL seems to be a pretty strandard attribute in RSS ... I could see using IRI ...
eh, we'll burn that bridge if the extension is ever
Why would you need multiple tag URIs with the same tagname but for different tag services. In theory, you would only need one tagname and any consuming service should pick it up.FYI, relTag support is something on our roadmap as well and should be implemented in the FireAnt directory in the not
Hello David,HTML is just one example of Hypertext. (Although probably the most popular one.)Both RSS and Atom are Hypertext too!Basically, if you've got links, then (by definition) you're Hypertext.
See yaOn 4/18/06, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
perhaps but doesnt HREF actuall mean
RSS doesn't have real links that you can click on, unless its rendered as HTML.
RSS isn't hypertext. It's just data. What you do with that data is
another story, and its quite common to use XSLT to transform RSS into
hypertext that can be rendered in a browser appropriately.
-Josh
On 4/18/06,
an ambiguous service picking up a tag *and* providing output links for 'users' to go to different services where relTag is supported wouldnt nec be illogical. On 4/18/06,
Joshua Kinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why would you need multiple tag URIs with the same tagname but for different tag
You wouldnt need the link portion at all I guess ... certainly the cloud services themselves woulodnt need it.I just figured it would be easier for a post to spell out what coulds its a part of than for every reader out there to revamp/recode and try to maintain/built-out links to all the
html, is code. view source. can you click on links?a 'browser app' translates the code to generate hypertext.the same can occur with xml and 'reader apps'On 4/18/06,
Joshua Kinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
RSS doesn't have real links that you can click on, unless its rendered as HTML.RSS isn't
Hello,(I read what I wrote here, and I noticed that it sounds a bit rude. Please note that I am NOT trying to be rude. E-mai just sometimes makes it sound that way. But anyways)I disagree.Whether you can click on a link or not is irrelevant. (clicking assumes a Human-Computer Interface that
yes, that is correct.also, just look here:http://www.w3.org/XML/LinkingOn 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,(I read what I wrote here, and I noticed that it sounds a bit rude. Please note that I am NOT trying to be rude. E-mai just sometimes makes it sound that
On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All you need from the Human-Computer Interface is some way of following links. I guess my question here is (and I ask only because you've got me thinking =P) ...
HTML is a mark up language. It comes with rules (or at least universal
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 19:50:00 +0200, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Not to get too far off topic here but the more I think about a tag
extension
to rss the more I love the idea. It could even have optional links to
various clouds. Something like:
[snip]
I imagine a script could
I think that despite the way things have transpired/evolved doesnt change the origins.since an application *can* be built and prob has been built to handle xml just as a web browser handles htmlthat's all that is needed to be known here. admittedly, xml is used as a format for data
well I guess because then its dependant on the feed to include the entire post body. Not all feeds do that and in some cases you wouldnt want them to. Wouldnt there be a few good use cases where you might want a headline feed (without full post body) but still have the tagging data with the
Hello David,On 4/18/06, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All you need from the Human-Computer Interface is some way of following links. I guess my question here is (and I ask only because you've got me thinking =P) ...
HTML
Yeah, if you're a spammer. :o)
- Andreas
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 21:49:05 +0200, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
well I guess because then its dependant on the feed to include the entire
post body. Not all feeds do that and in some cases you wouldnt want them
to. Wouldnt there be a few
actually another example...even though hypertext does not nec mean clickable links, a good example of non-html hypertext linking is a SMIL file that allows clicking visual media to go to a web page.
no HTML here at all.On 4/18/06, Michael Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that despite
? spammer ? lolI dont understand that one. It just seems to make sense to include meta data in the item element the same way we have an enclosure tag ... we all expect there to be an enclosure tag rather than saying readers should parse the body for rel=enclosure ... how is this different.
It
27 matches
Mail list logo
