Austin wrote: >Which post?
Ok, you have taken the following statement from the first post of mine to this thread >Structured information is an artificial artifact needed by computers in >most cases. We humans to not need it or want it! We are visual! (That is >our freedom) After that post Mattias counter argued, and I wrote another post where an example of structuring information would actually be counter productive (Using this email discussion as an object for analysis). I've pointed that by structuring the content of posts to the list (I've focused just on structuring references to other posts, but I could go deeper) one could benefit from all sorts of possibilities including the ability to properly reference multiple posts within a single posts in a way that a machine could understand (We usually use quote each other for referencing and provide counter arguments so a pattern can be derived). So it is obvious that the tool we use is not effective otherwise you would not get lost as your statements as shown. The following sentence was within the scope of my example: Austin wrote: >I'm sorry, Nuno, but I have absolutely no idea what that sentence means. Ok, ok, I'll rephrase it ... "There is no way for computer to distinguish different quotes taken from multiple posts in order for example to beatify it according to that or for example to simple access what was the post most referenced within a given thread." Austin wrote: >What? Ok, I'll try to rephrase it. Sorry but I'm really busy to recheck my spelling and grammar (and English is not my mother language). "So basically because of the computer cannot display posts in a way that allowing the reader to click on quotes and jump to referenced posts from where the quote was extracted from." If you don't understand I can email you directly the post that I'm mentioning. But I think you know the post otherwise you would not have written the following previously: Austin wrote: >What was the example? Was it the formatting of replies to the list? Both of >your examples were examples of structured content...one just had a lot more >(and redundant) meta information...which, of course, is uneeded in the >context of an informal email discussion. Again Austin wrote: >Again, though, when using email as an example, we're talking about a >specific bit of content in a specific environment. The whole structured >content argument is applicable where content is stored to be made readily >available for repurposing and display in a variety of environs. Yes, you need to Structure Information in a device agnostic manner for a machine to be able to display it in multiple devices using the so called templates. But one structures information not just to be able to publish it to multiple channels with less effort but also to allow machines to act "intelligently" on it to provide all sorts of automatisms. So basically Structuring Information is not just a matter of repurposing and display flexibility. I thought that we where on a Content Management list not a Redisplay/Repurpose Management list and that an intervenient such as you would have an holistic view on problems and technical decisions. People argue these matters by stating things as absolute truths. Different people say different things: * Authors should worry about writing information not presentation (True) * Authors should be able to express what they think in the most efficient manner (True) * User's should be able to access information in the mediums they choose (True) * Content Management should be purpose agnostic in order to be flexible in terms of applicability (True and Ouch) * Designer should focus on design not content (True) * etc etc What I'm saying although each position is not mutually exclusive they do influence each other when it comes to building an effective solution. Let's say that each position is represented by a person. We sit each person on a round table with a cloth over it (the cloth is CM technology). Now each person just tries to pull the cloth according to their concepts. When I use the term "holistic view" I mean to have the perception that in CM a technical decision can have impact in all vertices that touch the usage and applicability of a CMS and this may influence negatively an a specific solution (not just one but several) if not done with care. Austin wrote: >Email is written with a very specific mind set of the author. An email is >directed to a limited audience within the confines of an informal >conversation. You can say Email is this and is that because its use is this and intent is that. You can say this about Email because you know pretty well it's nature and applicability. But nevertheless it holds Content so it can be potentially used as an example of Content Type where structure is not that important (although it could benefit from a little structure as I exemplified in the other post). When I go to client I have no way to tell what kind of Content Types he wants to manage. Notice that we are in a CM list where people talk about Content Management issues so disregarding this example is like putting one head in to the sand, because I could provide you with loads of examples sharing the same usability issues of Email. If one makes generic statements around specific CM vertices (as exposed above) and its use one should have the holistic view that I'm talking about, otherwise don't make generic statement and focus on a specific set of business issues and environments and state them to in order not to launch confusion. >As such, it is seen as temporary, and of little interest for being >repurposed as is in a different environment. The content simply isn't >appropriate for complex structural markup, as it doesn't warrant it. Well because today email can be accessed is so many different devices such kind of repurposing is needed. Although as you notice it does not to be structured in so be done effectively :) (This is the oddity of email). In the end of this writing I noticed that you use the repurposing concept without stating its scope. But because you use this concept interchangeably with Device Agnostic Content Management I have taken for granted that you were using the term repurposing as the ability to direct the very same content (reformatting) to be display in multiple devices. Hope I have got it right, otherwise I must say that you are touching the realms of Science Fiction and I would like to see such a system work in ways compatible with your generic and flexible statements. Best regards, Nuno Lopes Independent Consultant. -- http://cms-list.org/ trim your replies for good karma.
