Re: [ydn-delicious] Re: Relaunch?
On 9/8/07, Joshua Schachter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No. I was saying that I understand the motivation and the problems. I think tagging does very well for ad-hoc categorization of stuff that is found via information foraging. I think it does less well when people are doing very specific research. I don't see this... or at least I don't see that folders solve the problem in a way better than tags do. Generally, when I do specific research (and I do a lot of it) I have a need for stability in the resources I am noting, so del.icio.us, which doesn't create any kind of page archive or snapshot has to be supplemented anyway. Perhaps if I relied solely on the links and trusted that the information would be there when I needed it-- as I need to for research purposes-- I would feel the pinch more dearly. Archiving would be useful, which could go beyond using date tags to replicate. My most desired feature is an expansion in the boolean abilities (which might also take care of some of the needs that folders are being considered for. c -- Chris Lott
[ydn-delicious] Hiding Tags and Auto Bundles
I've been using the uri:asin:xxx tag assuming that sometime in the future it might enable some interesting auto-linking stuff. And even if it doesn't, I need some kind of convention for tags used when I pull feeds elsewhere. Similarly, I 'd like to use something like: author:last,first etc... But even with just using the standard uri tag, the display of such tags are starting to be irritating. It would be cool to be able to hide classes of tag from display. There's no reason to, by default at least, need to see all the uri:asin links in this page, for instance: http://del.icio.us/fncll/ToRead Also, it would nice to be able to have all tags with a certain name, prefix, or of a type added to a bundle. So all uri:asin:x tags would be automatically added to the zBookRefs bundle on my list... c
Re: [ydn-delicious] Change Date of post?
On 9/8/06, Laura Lemay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is it so awful to delete the item and re-add it? You can do that through the API (and use the updated date stamp of your choice). Kludgy but works. Depends on how one defines so awful. This is a list for exactly this kind of discussion, so I'm discussin' it. Meanwhile I'll continue deleteing/re-adding and other workarounds and kludges to mimic a last updated/touch date :) c Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ydn-delicious/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ydn-delicious/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [ydn-delicious] Change Date of post?
On 9/7/06, Darren Chamberlain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How about tagging these as read:/MM/DD or something like that? Sure, thanks for the suggestion. But the problem remains that the feed, which shows the most recently read X books still won't show the most recent titles because the date doesn't change when they are updated and I add titles a lot quicker than I read them :) c Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ydn-delicious/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [ydn-delicious] Change Date of post?
On 9/8/06, Joshua Schachter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One interesting idea: The tag items store their own index numbers (in this case, the creation date of the post.) One idea would be to store instead the time the tag was added to the item, which would USUALLY be the time the item was created. Still, lots of complexities abound here... That was actually something I was thinking about this morning... functionally it makes sense, since the resource has been updated -- but I realize that messing with dates causes all kinds of potential ramifications-- the ugliest one being the spam potential... c Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ydn-delicious/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ydn-delicious/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [ydn-delicious] Change Date of post?
I understand about adding a second tag instead of changing the date (that's frustrating for different reasons-- I already do tag for the class and they aren't necessarily intro items they are just items that have more significance at a particular date), but this isn't the only situation where this becomes a problem. Here's another: On the front of my blog I list the most recent books I plan to read, am reading, and have read, using the tags ToRead, NowReading, and DidRead. The problem is that when I change a book from ToRead to NowReading or DidRead, since the date doesn't change, it doesn't show up in the list as the most recently read-- it still has the date it was added to my reading list originally... so it doesn't show up unless I delete and re-add it. So while there are workarounds, and I appreciate them, being able to change the date of the post would be extremely helpful. c Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ydn-delicious/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ydn-delicious/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [ydn-delicious] Change Date of post?
On 9/7/06, Larson, Timothy E. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But you (speaking of the abstract you) don't want to lose the date of original posting, either. What you want is a creation date and a modified date...and a way to sort by date modified rather than date created. Ideally and in the general case, yes. But if I have to choose, the latest date is preferable. Similarly I could touch links to know when the last time was that I used them, checked them. etc. c -- Chris Lott Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ydn-delicious/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ydn-delicious/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[ydn-delicious] Change Date of post?
I'd like a way to change the date of a post (or reset it to today if nothing else)-- in feeds I use for classes I like to highlight some basic resources early on-- but they get obscured by all the later posts. Short of deleting and relinking, it would be nice to be able to make them new again... c Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/7EuRwD/fOaOAA/yQLSAA/IHFolB/TM ~- Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ydn-delicious/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ydn-delicious/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [ydn-delicious] Re: Boolean
On 6/19/06, Joshua Schachter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In general, a very small slice of user traffic makes use of intersections. I suspect that more complicated queries would be even less used. I don't know that this kind of extrapolation is particularly valid or relevant. Of course most of the direct (tag based) browsing will be simply of individual tags-- just like most searches are simple terms. The real question is how much less NOT or OR would be used than any other complex search. It might not be as small a group as you think. I suspect it would be used more as people started using del.icio.us as the base for other systems, group tagging, etc. I very rarely feel stymied at the missing functions when I am using del.icio.us personally and directly, but it is a direct impediment to using that data for other group/organization uses, as well as feeding other resources. In those cases I simply don't use del.icio.us at all. Of course the same can be said for the limitations on non-API feeds, making truly productive group shared-tagging applications (sans sharing accounts) severely limited in a way not felt at all outisde that context. In both cases the potentual use and audience is hard to judge because it isn't just a subset of current users that must be considered, but a bunch of previously impossible/impractical uses! I know del,icio.us has to walk a line in implementation (and have argued here before when it comes to keeping other features out/hidden), so don't take this as criticism, simply observation. c -- Chris Lott Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/6pRQfA/fOaOAA/yQLSAA/IHFolB/TM ~- Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ydn-delicious/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [ydn-delicious] Re: Boolean
On 6/20/06, Hamish MacEwan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It seems reasonable to extrapolate from the low utilisation simpler complexities, that greater complexity would be even less used. Fair enough, except that what is complex is in part determined by the use. I simply think that positing the use of OR/NOT as ONLY a subset of those who use the current AND facility is inaccurate. I think if such features were available we would see more uptake than one might expect looking only at direct browsing statistics. In those cases I simply don't use del.icio.us at all. An under-shot non-user market is only worth pursuing if it is large enough to justify the cost. But I think this is an undershot market of application not an undershot group of users. That can be statistically significant. Further, I think it is right in the zone of one of what I perceive to be a del.icio.us goal-- to facilitate research and use to see what tagging and folksonomic application of resources can grow to be, not just catering to the most popular uses. Indeed, it is difficult and I think the best evidence, actual use of available features, however supports the conclusion Joshua et al have made, while the opportunity exists for third-parties to supplement that functionality without permission. Agreed, which is why I find the lack of more query techniques less vexing than other problems. There is a difference in the two things I am talking about. I can create a local app using my del data that can give me further query logic (though that is tedious, painful, and the fact that few do it is in no way a predictor of how it might be used). I cannot, however, work around the intrinsic limitations that work actively against group tagging because what is lost to history in the RSS feeds is simply lost and not recoverable outside of the API. c Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ~-- See what's inside the new Yahoo! Groups email. http://us.click.yahoo.com/2pRQfA/bOaOAA/yQLSAA/IHFolB/TM ~- Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ydn-delicious/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [ydn-delicious] Are tag intersections broken?
On 5/13/06, voidfiles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For the longest time I have been exploring del.icio.us through tag intersections. like del.icio.us/tag/blog+design. But for a month or two no results show up for that URL. I can search for those tags though. Am I just missing something? I'm noticing this too, which is quite frustrating... is this feature slated to return soon? Intersections only seem to be working within a particular user's tags at this point. c -- Chris Lott YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "ydn-delicious" 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.
Re: [ydn-delicious] Are tag intersections broken?
On 5/16/06, Toby Elliott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tag intersections are working, but they are slow when we get a lot of requests, which causes some browsers to time out. We're aware of the problem and are taking steps to remedy it that you should start seeing soon. Maybe I'm experiencing a different problem then. What I was looking for didn't time out, it just returned a no results page? e.g. http://del.icio.us/tag/idesignak+RSS c YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "ydn-delicious" 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.
Re: [delicious-discuss] notes maximum length?
On 4/17/06, Larson, Timothy E. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chris Lott wrote: I agree that I don't want to see del go the route of having too many fields to fill in. Even when they are optional they have a stifling kind of effect. If they are hidden unless you choose to see them, how are they going to stifle anything? They aren't-- I was referring to default and required fields. When you get past that, then you are in the domain of trying to decide what del.icio.us is for and how the proposed additions benefit its mission-- if it's data that only 20% of users will ever bother with, is it worth worrying about? c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] notes maximum length?
On 4/17/06, Hamish MacEwan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 4/18/06, Chris Lott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: if it's data that only 20% of users will ever bother with, is it worth worrying about? Firstly I think if the needs and/or desires of 20% of users don't matter, we can stop worrying about the blind and otherwise perception impaired, and slivers like Mac OSX and Firefox users can equally be ignored. There are different segments of x%. You are talking about x% of all users, I am talking about x% of use of features :) Often a small percentage of users can account for a lot of activity. My point is that there are many features which will be useful only to a small and not otherwise distinct subset of users and I think one should think very carefully about implementing those ideas. Not because I am against new things (some things *I* would like to see fall into this category too :) but because other sites have suffered a lot from feature-itis and unneeded complexity. I like that del.icio.us is sleek and focuses on its core competencies, slowly extending as need and use become clear and evident. I would suggest that extending the description field will engage more than 20% of users who use the field at all. It will tangentially address at least some of the other needs expressed here which stem, at least in part, from wanting to put more metadata in. Since that is on the slate already, it then becomes a question of what metadata is useful enough to a broad enough base of users to merit inclusion at all. When that is decided, placement is a design issue. The ability to make things optional doesn't make every possible optional feature equally useful/valuable. A keywords field is a good example. I just don't see the utility in capturing even that small percentage that will differentiate keywords and tags, particularly since we already have a search capability and tagging. Not all capture of data is necessarily useful. If it were, there would never be a rejected idea and we would already have 100+ optional fields for everything from media type to meta-tag to keyword-- just browse the list archives to see how many have been proposed. c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] obtaining aggregate post counts for URLs bookmarked on del.icio.us
On 4/11/06, andycoatz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Shanti, The only way I've found of doing that so far is by parsing the actual /url/ page. I've found you have to be careful not to get throttled though! It's more fragile, and you don't get all the other data to play with, but since the count is always listed in the same format, a little regex magic should be able to extract the number from this chunk of HTML on the url page: h4 class=smaller nom this url has been saved by x person. /h4 It's the same position for one or multiple: h4 class=smaller nom this url has been saved by x people. /h4 c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] How to Create Multi-word Tags?
The whole thing is building on sand... we talk about being exact in correlating tags which themselves are inexactly applied to their subjects. Even the entities that use exactly the same tag can be quite divergent (and therein lies the richness). c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] How to Create Multi-word Tags?
An overriding aspect that is being lost in this conversation is the quest for perfection when it comes to search, retrieval, and browsy. Algorithmic clustering will never be as exact as strict controlled vocabulary classifications. It is fuzzier and messier. The latter systems have problems of their own of course. The real payoff comes in the larger base of available material because the data isn't behind a gatekeeper. Of course Joshua and others will probably keep striving to make the algorithms smarter and better, but there will always be fuzziness there and that's perfectly OK with me. There's an obvious logical dissonance underneath tagging systems that must be recognized for what it is (intractable). c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[delicious-discuss] Re: [pmwiki-users] Fwd: RFC: Core candidate offerings
Well, I have a strong + for the integration of blocklist and a slightly weaker + for idea #2 (\ newlines) c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[delicious-discuss] Re: [pmwiki-users] Blocklist2 bug (was: Re: Blocklist2 ignoring EnableWhyBlocked)
On 4/1/06, H. Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Change if ($EnableWhyBlocked == 1) $EditMessageFmt .= pre . $WhyBlockedFmt . /pre; to if ($EnableWhyBlocked == 1) $MessagesFmt[] = pre . $WhyBlockedFmt . /pre; Ok, I made those changes, and while I now get a message that This post has been blocked by the administrator, it doesn't list any of the reasons why, Have you set $EnableWhyBlocked = 1; I'm having the same issue in my farm... I made the changes suggested in blocklist2.php and have $EnableWhyBlocked = 1; but the only message I get is the generic This post has been blocked by the administrator. c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[delicious-discuss] Re: [pmwiki-users] Blocklist2 bug (was: Re: Blocklist2 ignoring EnableWhyBlocked)
On 4/1/06, Chris Lott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm having the same issue in my farm... I made the changes suggested in blocklist2.php and have $EnableWhyBlocked = 1; but the only message I get is the generic This post has been blocked by the administrator. Never mind, I got it working using the csmb-blocklist script instead, which is great for my purposes! c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[delicious-discuss] sorry!
Sorry for the misdirected messages! c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] new features
On 3/10/06, Joshua Schachter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am merely unconvinced that people are able to get value out of a giant blob of text. Well, it seems pretty clear that some people DO at some times, whether you want to believe it or not. The real question here is how often and how much-- one can't put EVERYTYHING that is of value to particular people into the interface. The blob of text is very useful for taking the temperature of a link (or a site, etc. as the case of the tag cloud may be). I find this quite useful on sites that I do not know-- a tag cloud, *particularly* a large one, can give a quick sense of the context of the publication or site (what political slant, do they cover topic X, Y or Z, regional focus, etc). I see the same thing as sometimes valuable for a link-- the difference is that I can assess the content of most links themselves quicker so the context is less valuable than for a whole site-- though not often enough that it warrants (to me) being poked into one's eye for every URL. Why not just have it as a linked option so people can get at it if they want to see it? c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] dead horses and shared accounts
On 2/24/06, Joshua Schachter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: They could already do that. Infoworld does. Sure it *can* be done, but it's painful for, I think, obvious reasons. I don't know about getting into true trust relationships, but I do look forward to any changes that make group collaboration activities and the whole social bit more straightforward (ie that get around the difficulties in switching accounts and/or limitations in rss feeds)... That, of course, is the subject of the post I made which started this thread :) c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] Re: Feature Request: Search doesn't includeoption to edit
I belong to a number of good Yahoo groups that are also available as a mailing list and they seem to work just fine. I'd much prefer that because I prefer mailing lists for this kind of thing (nothing beats a good mail client a list) but having a web-based archive and place for occasional access is good. Using a group that is also accessible as a list, setting the options to be that any new members' first post must be moderated-- and perhaps spreading around some of the moderation responsibilities for that specific task (not monitoring anything but is this spam or not) seems like a decent route to avoiding spam and saving the email option. c -- Chris Lott ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[delicious-discuss] dead horses and shared accounts
Once again, I'm trying to devise a middle ground between account sharing (ugly for authentication, etc) and the data loss that comes from RSS feeds only retaining some recent items which makes the ideal model of just sharing tags a little less useful (so when I want to repurpose myuniquetag+widgets every six months I only see the most recent selection, but need all of them). What about having feeds available in the API for a ALL items with tag X (and tag intersections) in del.icio.us while the public RSS feeds remain just a limited, recent selection? Then you could quash abusers but still make collaboration a bit easier for organizations... c -- Chris Lott ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] Navigation continued...
But in the real world, titles just don't often start with their subjects and the likelihood of an alphabetical search yielding results is always less than a simple search for the same. If I feel that a user can't search, I can always provide links that do the search for them. As for your podcasts, I wasn't even thinking of having the episode number, just something to say that this was a podcast link regardless of episode number. More recent links are at the top for a reason. Basically, it's NOT that hard to do. Your response is along the lines of it doesn't have it now so it should always be that way. I'm not arguing how hard it is to do, I'm saying it is more complex than just adding an SQL query because there are many other places to consider the effects of that sorting. That's all, nothing more and nothing less. You can't really justify your approach either except that you don't understand it. If no one in the world had done any of the things I don't understand, we'd still be in caves. I don't accept that response. No, I UNDERSTAND it, I just think that it would be useful for almost no one almost none of the time. Unfortunately, the truth is that users often think they want things that turn out not to be so useful (thus date-based blog archives, for instance). That's why I asked for specific examples. Those examples have so for not been compelling (to me anyway). What YOU don't seem to get is that there might be people who understand your request but simply don't agree with your position regarding its usefulness :) Again, and for the final time, I don't accept the argument that because you don't like it, it doesn't make sense for anyone. And that's basically the only reason not to do this any of you can come up with. If I told my clients that, they wouldn't even bother saying goodbye, they'd just be gone. I'm not making that argument-- I'm waiting for a convincing scenario in which alphabetic listing trumps search or where it even seems remotely useful. As a user, I am one of the group you are theorizing about, and I'm not seeing it. The converse of the I don't like it, so it must not be useful for anyone is your I like it, so it must be useful for anyone-- neither are necessarily true. They have no validity in and of themselves. It's ordered chronologically, in reverse order. Why? Is the last thing I entered more meaningful to me than the first? Who made that decision? Not I. Like a LOT of decisions, this was made by the software designer. Not every aspect of every interface can be customized. That's just life. If del.icio.us is so vexing to you, and Joshua doesn't decide to see it your way, I'm sure you will find some happy alternative. That's the beauty-- no tool has to be everything to everyone, right? I do sympathize, though, having been on the opposite side of this kind of argument (in my case, after much work to get what I wanted it turned out I was wrong-- we should all be so lucky :), but I'm not sure that your hostility is helping you AT ALL. c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] Navigation continued...
On 2/5/06, sheila miguez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * btw, I'm sure someone must have considered list recency and primacy effects with respect to recall? anything interesting from that which informs this discussion? e.g. Someone haves a vague feeling that they saved something, and will possibly remember that it was close in time or far in time. at least they could partition their data based on this to do a sort or search, no? I was thinking about this last night while using another product that does the familiar today, yesterday, last week, last month kind of sorting. I find that a somewhat useful view on a regular basis-- .looking for something I vaguely remember linking a week or so ago. But beyond that it's all just past-- only once in a great while do I have a query where the further date-based aggregation would be useful like I know I linked this IP location tool at etech in March of last year. Hardly enough to warrant it being a useful feature. Oh, and the link was Plazes.com :) c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[delicious-discuss] bloglines having problems with delicious feeds?
Any reports of general problems between bloglines and delicious? All of my delicious feeds in bloglines are showing up as non-existent and have been for days, and my staff and faculty are reporting the same problem. I'm checking with bloglines folks too, but figured I'd check here. c -- Chris Lott ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[delicious-discuss] Why delicious sucks (not)
http://www.edtechpost.ca/mt/archive/000740.html It's all about communication... having been on the wrong side with some other sites and services, I can understand his frustration! c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[delicious-discuss] Related Links not working?
Is the Related Items feature disabled currently? I've tried a number of different links and Related Items seems to be revealing nothing. I was going to use that as part of a demo today. If not, does anyone happen to have a couple of screenshots I could show? c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] feature request: turn off tag roll
On 12/28/05, joshua schachter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's a good idea. We'll add it to the todo list. Well, I hope you make it an optional or remembered preference. It would be incredibly annoying to have to click more to get to tags--- I, and I suspect many others, DON'T go to del.icio.us just to see the most recently added tags. In fact, that would be the part I would rather have the option of hiding :) c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] A tag that combines descriptors?
On 12/22/05, Mike Nowak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tag intersections already do this, in a way. If you tag something science fiction, and you want to find something marked science and fiction, then you just look at http://del.icio.us/tag/science+fiction As far as I'm concerned, this makes it more accurate since it'll not only show up as science+fiction but science and fiction too, which is a small but useful difference. This is much more true of some compounds (like science fiction) than others, like white house or pop art -- but I don't see the problem with running such things together if desired? c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] sharing a tag or using a shared account
On 12/8/05, Clay Shirky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In my experience, the shared tag is generally better than the shared account, because knowing the source of a URL/tag pair is quite valuable, and becomes more valuable over the long haul. (This was the strategy adopted by the 'nptech' group, and is the one I use when I want to share bookmarks with groups of students.) The two potential issues to this approach are that it requires each group member to sign up for del.icio.us (a speedbump) and the possibility that people outside the group will add your tag by design (assuming you create one that won't be used by accident.) This could be good or bad, depending on your purposes. Thanks-- those two potential issues aren't a big problem. The real potential problem spot I see is the inability to get *all* links for a tag or tag combination outside of the API-- so if I have a shared tag foofoo then at some point I lose the ability to programatically get at all the foofoo items because non-api access through RSS is limited to a recent historical set... How are you dealing with this? The tag party is an interesting idea... c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] increasing the number of del.icio.us users reducing spam
On 12/5/05, Brian Del Vecchio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd rather have tools that help me sift through the river for valuable items. I find the recommendations very useful, and would love to see more work like this. I agree. I'm not interested in who is the most influential though I am VERY interested in who is the most influential when related to Chris' links. The former is a game, the latter is a tool for finding new information. One of the reasons I have stayed with del.icio.us is that I have a fair amount of trust that Joshua wants to focus on the usefulness and leverage of the social network effects to uncover and recover information. c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] Search Return Set Returns Too Many Items
On 12/3/05, Rocco Caputo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, you're making sense. I'm working on an updated search engine that won't do this, but be aware that some people consider it a feature. I think it's a feature-- just one that should be separated in the search results in some way... c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] Re: Frequently Accessed Sites
On 11/29/05, DeWitt Clinton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://delancey.unto.net/ Interesting. I would like to see transparent click-tracking like this in delicious. I don't like that right-clicking a link increments the counter, but I can see a rationale for having it so... c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] Searching - problem with tag: search?
On 11/19/05, Brian Del Vecchio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In this context, you can't possibly expect 100% matches when you're searching--if so, what search engine has you so incredibly spoiled? 8^) I do expect that if I put a term in the search box that term appears in the results that are returned to me. Everything else is suggestions. Which is cool, but then it should be labelled properly (as I indicated earlier: label the different kinds of results appropriately). A keyword search is just that-- not a conceptual search. If I wanted items tagged GTD by others, I would just use the existing del.icio.us/tag/gtd function. c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] Searching - problem with tag: search?
On 11/19/05, Chris Lott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If I wanted items tagged GTD by others, I would just use the existing del.icio.us/tag/gtd function. But don't get me wrong.. the search results that are, essentially, your items which have been tagged by others (but not yourself) with what you are searching for, are definitely a keeper! c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] Searching - problem with tag: search?
On 11/11/05, Rocco Caputo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This accidental behavior is interesting. On one hand, the results you've shown are on-topic for _Getting Things Done_. On the other hand, you don't specifically consider them to be or you'd have tagged them gtd yourself. It is interesting-- I guess I already have the tag search by clicking on a tag, but there is a big difference between stemming and conceptually related tags. It seems to me that there are multiple kinds of results for a tag search that are distinct from one another... my items with that specific tag my items where that tag appears within or as a root for other tags my items that others have applied the tag though I have not others' items with that tag It probably goes without saying that it would be nice to have an RSS feed for search results :) c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[delicious-discuss] for:x from all users is non-sensical?
When viewing items you have tagged for someone else (for:x), the related tags listing gives you an option to view for:x from all users -- which, of course, you cannot access... unless you are x (though I'm not sure how you could get to that screen if you were x, unless you browse to http://del.icio.us/fncll/for:x manually, which makes no sense). Which is a long way of saying that it doesn't seem like the from all users shouldn't appear on for:x pages... c -- Chris Lott ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] pc mag delicious review
On 10/24/05, Paul Denning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 04:07 PM 2005-10-23, Chris Lott wrote: Maybe what we need most is a bookmarks version of RSS that everyone could more easily tap into so the whole space could explode. del.icio.us already has RSS feeds. No, no. What I mean is an XML interchange format for the bookmarks themselves that formalized the data so that it would be easier to go from service to service and track other associated information *automatically*. Ultimately this would provide a better mechanism than RSS itself is (or maybe it could be some extension of RSS or ATOM, whatever) for interchange between services. I would like to be able to have links filtered and raised in status based on their presence and linking not just in del.icio.us, but in a federation of bookmark services... then we could maintain the scale that makes the social aspect work while allowing people to choose their own tools as front-ends: spurl, furl, del.icio.us, etc. c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] Tagging practices
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,69084,00.html I find this article of tips on tagging to be a little suspect. At least, my advice would be the opposite: don't worry about overlaps and use more tags. Their example of these tags: color scheme web design being better than: these tags: color scheme web development design css rgb hex pantone webdev for a bookmark seems intuitively wrong (depending on the content of the article). c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] Flock, the New Browser on the Block, integrating del.icio.us
The key idea in flock (to me) is simplicity. I work with a lot of faculty and students who would do well to take advantage of the affordances of social software like del.icio.us and flickr. And while they do so, most do so only to a minimal level. I think we in the geek crowd tend to forget how complex some of this stuff is for average users and how difficult it is to create and sustain a group using a myriad of plug-ins and extensions and web-services to try to achieve what is really pretty simple integration. If flock can help with that, then I am all for it. I don't see their chosen target as the result of a lack of innovation, or if it is, at least it is after a different and equally worthwhile goal. c -- Chris Lott ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[delicious-discuss] count of items using tag
It would be nice, when browsing a specific tag for all users, to have a count of total items using that tag displayed. c -- Chris Lott ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] auto consolidation of URLs with and without www
CLEARLY, no one wants to see URLs that point do different resources combined into one! But at the same time, it's just as clearly somewhat misleading (and personally an annoyance) when URLs that DO point to the same site are listed no differently from URLs that point to different sites. I don't see how this could be effectively determined automatically. Some kind of voting system might be more reliable, but what happens to a user's tags when two URLs are combined? And couldn't this be gamed or vandalized a bit? The fact that a site can be split four ways does seem to be a problem when it comes to making accurate recommendations. If rankings and clustering depend in part upon influencers, then a site that is inthe database as: http://www.foo.com/ http://foo.com/ http://www.foo.com/index.html and http://food.com/index.html has effectively had their place perhaps significantly changed... c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [delicious-discuss] Del.icio.us in education
My whole *job* at the moment involves, among other things, integrating social software into the educational process (for both faculty and students). Del.icio.us is a primary tool in our arsenal for everything from simple repurposability (integrating bookmark feeds into LMS class sites) to social applications within classes/disciplines, and ultimately as a part of creating de-facto e-portfolios. There are an incredible number of potentially useful scenarios, particularly as our faculty are guided towards a more constructivist environment and given the nature of learning communities... c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[delicious-discuss] Tag Cloud distribution formula/algorithm
I've been experimenting with building my own tag cloud using my del.icio.us bookmarks as data. It's simple enough to make an even distribution... but given the long tail of tag distribution, the cloud doesn't really reflect the data accurately. For instance, given a min of 1 and max of 100 items for any given tag, with four font sizes, I could grop by 1-25, 26-50, etc But it really should be grouping 1-8, 9-30,31-76,77-100 or something-- logarithmic?-- to make very distinct the delineations between the mass of tags that have only a few items and the rest. Does anyone have any sample code that creates a better distribution? Forgive my complete mathematical inaccuracy and description-- I'm a poet at heart :) c ___ discuss mailing list discuss@del.icio.us http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
