wrote:
> You know I'm only joking when I say something like "this is retarded"
> (i never said *you* were retarded :-)
Touché. :o)
Fortunately we're all friends here!
>> What is needed for this to happen is a standardized data format. Only if
>> you have a standard format can this work. I've mentioned xFolk more than
>> once to you because xFolk is what can take this to the next level where
>> I
>> can tag *any* page on the web on my own blog.
>
> This is the problem. Not everyone is a blogger. Tags do not and should
> not revolve around bloggers.
Yes, I mean no. You're right that not everyone is a blogger. Not everyone
has a blog to put their tags on. But services that gives non-bloggers the
option to tag 'stuff' should provide a public page of that person's tags
in the same standard data format everyone else is using. The result is the
same, there's just less use of the word "blog".
> xFolk is still too complicated for anyone to use -- its really hard to
> write by hand, tough to generate through automation, and even harder
> to spider and aggregate. Besides, the spec is not settled yet so there
> is no reason to adopt it at this point. It may see its day, but it is
> not usable now. xFolk is simply a spec, but it is not a spec that is
> in use, and that is what makes all the difference. Something easier
> could come along and blow xFolk out of the water (Technorati-style
> tags are way way easier, so for now that's my preference. Plus
> Technorati considers the "Category" element in RSS as a tag too, so it
> works with existing standards -- Hallelujah!).
Since we're all friends here: No whining.
C'mon. We're trying to do something no one else has done. Of course the
spec isn't done yet, and of course it's not in use. No one has done
anything like this. If you only want to use well-established standards
you'll never move forward. We'd all be stuck on typewriters because noone
dared to use this new weird standard of transistors.
xFolk is xhtml. It is very easy to parse. There's what? 3 class attributes
and a rel attribute to look out for. I can't see what could be easier for
designating a tag for an arbitrary URL.
Technorati tags (RelTag) serves a different purpose (as you pointed out).
With Technorati tags I can only tag pages *I* control. I can't tag one of
your blog entries.
It's too bad Technorati uses the <category> element for their tag pages.
In time I think you'll see them remove that (or so I hope). They'll fail
for the same reason Adam pointed out meta keywords failed. They're too
easy to fake because they're invisible.
>> the information is *free*. Then you can talk about having a basis
>> for innovation - collecting the data is no longer the issue. You can
>> focus
>> on Doing Cool Stuff.
>
> What I envision is more of a tagging ping service. Not unlike blog
> ping services. Something that lets you notify when tags are created,
> what is tagged, who tagged it, where is it tagged, and what the tag
> is. This is simple enough, built on existing protocols and could
> enable new types of tools and services.
You're keeping everything in the dark with a system like that. One has to
be a member of the elite ping club to recieve notifications of tag pings.
No, an open data format that anyone can tap into and mine is much better.
You will probably need pings because they are efficient for letting
services know you updated. But don't lock your tag information away. Let
the ping help me by giving me a way of telling my favourite services that
I've updated. But don't make the fucking data collecting your business
model.
What's the difference between a custom tag ping and the xFolk entry? The
tag ping is hidden away. The xFolk entry is out there free for anyone to
tap into.
> This is not too different from what Technorati is already doing,
> except they aren't really providing their aggregated data back to the
> community either, so their service isn't as open as you claim -- its
> accessed through an API the same way Flickr and Delicious are.
> At the end of the day, you do need to retain some kind of value in
> your service otherwise there is no incentive to provide services.
You've missed my point. You don't have to rely on one company like
Technorati to provide you with all the services you want. The data format
is open. Write your own spider, collect the tags yourself. Do with them
what you want.
That's what the web is built upon. You *can* build a business model around
open data formats. Just look at the web. If it was built on the same
principles Flickr has and you are apparently promoting we would not have
one common web. We'd have one web for the MS Internet Explorer crowd and
one for the Netscape crowd and you wouldn't be able to visit pages if you
didn't use the right browser for the right page. There wouldn't even *be*
a Firefox because there's no way it could break into the market.
- Andreas
--
<URL:http://www.solitude.dk/>
Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
