Re: [delicious-discuss] system:language?
On 6/13/05, The Bo$$ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Would it be possible for del.icio.us to have a new system tag organised by language, such as system:language:eo (for all Esperanto pages)? The problem would be detecting the page's language, not all pages declare it in the HTML tag... Interestingly, there are lexical/analytical ways to determine what language a document belongs to ... but I'm not sure if Del really is the engine that should be tasked with the effort. On the other hand, nothing keeps a third-party from writing a tool that does nothing but watch the Del overall feed, grab updated lists of URLs, analyze them, and tag the updates appropriately. Kind of an interesting thought. -- Alexander Williams ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Proprietor of the Squid's Redoubt (http://chancel.org:8000/Redoubt) ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[delicious-discuss] Idea of input interface: source and larger extended field
On 6/12/05, Pietro Speroni di Fenizio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Few days ago I wrote an entry (see below) on how I thought delicious should let users tag url with an approximation of a tag cloud instead than with a tag set. This by considering as relevant the order of the tags. Pietro: I read your proposal with great interest, but I don't think the idea of tagging with an approximated power set/cloud really matches the expectation of how people actually tag. I know its not how I tag, if it matters. Essentially, the difficulty is the issue of order in terms of my conception. If I tag a post as fiction, prose, science, I'm not trying to say that the fact its prose fiction is more important than the fact it's about science. On the contrary, I CAN'T say, because that meaning is ultimately in the mind of the community as a whole, not in my perception. By assuming my tag set is really a cloud, you're injecting meaning where there really isn't any. Further, if Del started assuming tags are input as clouds rather than sets, it would actually limit my expressibility. I can't say, in such a context, that an entity is equally two or more (or potentially a lot more) things; there's an implicit hierarchy. I thought we were trying to get away from preconceived hierarchies? From my perspective, the tag cloud as an entity can ONLY occur post hoc, once the community has commented on the nature of the entity with tag sets. Assuming (or even requiring) that the attached notation is a cloud rather than a set invalidates a lot of the meaning you can derive from the resulting hypercloud. It means LESS that, knowing the annotations are clouds, that the word that comes up most often first is prose, rather than in the current state of tag sets, the word prose occurs most frequently. This isn't intended as a heavy criticism of the idea of tag clouds as meaningful. On the contrary, I think the post hoc observation of tag clouds over time is THE best means of understanding how the community thinks of an entity. I disagree that its worth the cognitive overhead to think of tagging with tag clouds rather than sets. -- Alexander Williams ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Proprietor of the Squid's Redoubt (http://chancel.org:8000/Redoubt) ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] Idea of input interface: source and larger extended field
On 6/12/05, Joshua Schachter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been thinking of allowing a URL as a tag, but this gets complicated very quickly and I have not yet thought out all the implications. Actually, can't we already use a URL as a tag? There's nothing I can find currently that constrains me from tagging with, say, source::http://zamiel.livejournal.com; for example. If folks want to communally start using that format and post-processing on that tag-format, I don't see any reason they shouldn't. As I see it, that kind of embedding isn't the responsibility of the tag embedding engine, but of the presentation engine, which is a seperate beast altogether. This is currently a database limitation; I am looking at extending it. It is constrained mainly because the tool is designed to let you cue your memory with some notes, not be a full blog (which is what it will become if we make it larger. People will ask for markup and so on. What does the interface look like? How would it get displayed? How do I prevent griefers? And so on. So, just specify its 1024 characters long and cannot contain HTML markup. In this case, its a matter of fiat as much as it is of definition. You could leave the field length just as it is, if you really wanted to, if, as another poster put it below, you were to give some better feedback on how much space there is on entry. But I'm with others in wanting a somewhat larger field. (For full blogging-like tagging, Wetaste (http://www.wetaste.com/taste.php) allows full-form notation and markup ...) (Unrelated, and possibly outside your control, but can we get the ML's default reply-to set to the list and not to the poster. Its most annoying.) -- Alexander Williams ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Proprietor of the Squid's Redoubt (http://chancel.org:8000/Redoubt) ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
