Oooo... yeah, I hadn't even thought about people using a domain as their microblogging ID, but it makes sense for single-user laconi.ca (or other platform) instances.
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Joe Cascio, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Absolutely agree. A URI is the only way. > I think the most compelling reason, other that being a well-known standard > already, is that a URI makes discovery possible. So, for instance, I could > be "http://joecascio.net";. Just like my blog home page declares my OpenID > server and delegate, so it could declare my microblogging server and ID. > This also helps to attack the problem of ID proliferation. The individual > sub-IDs I may be known by for email, IM, microblogging or whatever now can > be subsumed by one master ID, or as many as I want to have to serve my > various on-line activities, sort of like carrying multiple credit cards. > > JoeC > > On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 12:53 PM, Derek Gathright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> How exactly we namespace micro-blogging usernames was a topic Evan >> discussed at Bearhug Camp and unfortunately I wasn't able to be in >> attendance to throw in my 2 cents. But to me this is an extremely important >> issue that deserves discussion, so I'm bringing the debate here. >> >> Here's the problem (as I see it): If >> microblogging/micromessaging/tweeting/whateveryouwanttocallit is going to >> truly be cross-platform, there needs to be a way to direct messages not only >> to users within your own platform (i.e. Twitter, Identi.ca, etc...) as well >> as direct messages to users on other platforms (like how email works). >> Also, when your message/tweet is sent to another platform and it has an >> @reply in it, how is that @reply portrayed on that other platform? >> >> Example: Currently there are Identi.ca users that make use of a bridge to >> relay their messages from Identi.ca to Twitter, and when those messages >> contain an @reply, those also get carried over to Twitter. That's fine & >> dandy until someone sends an @reply to identi.ca/bob who is different >> from twitter.com/bob, and twitter.com/bob starts getting all these tweets >> in his reply timeline that are not really supposed to be directed at him. >> The purist in me says that is a big issue that needs to be resolved before >> more people start doing the same thing (*cough* >> http://laconi.ca/trac/ticket/68) because it can have a detrimental effect >> on the experience for users on other systems. >> >> Unfortunately I don't remember all the options Evan had written on the >> whiteboard at Bearhug Camp, but here are some that I had thought of a few >> weeks back when this issue arose >> >> @identi.ca/derek >> @derek/identi.ca >> @derek::identi.ca >> @[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> @http://identi.ca/derek >> etc... >> >> You can see patterns develop, and really it just comes down to what >> symbols you want to use. So what are the similarities/differences between >> them? Well, all of them are made-up URI's aside from the ones that actually >> point to the user's true URI, @http://identi.ca/derek & @identi.ca/derek. >> >> As a client developer that has played with mixing twitter & >> identi.catimelines (unlike Twhirl for example which separates them into >> different >> windows) I've really thought about this issue, and the only one that >> really makes sense to me is the true URI. If micro-blogging proliferates >> as much as we hope, multi-platform clients are going to be fed many @reply >> messages directed at users that aren't hosted on their platform. If I get a >> message that contains @derek/twitarmy in my client, I would have have zero >> idea where to actually point for that user's URI or what platform "twitarmy" >> even is unless I rely on a list of all the micro-blogging platforms out >> there (bad idea). However, if my client gets a message that contains @ >> army.twit.tv/derek and I have never heard of "army.twit.tv", it's no big >> deal because I have a great idea of where to point my user to in order to >> find more information about "derek". Platforms and/or clients can also of >> course hide the service domain if it doesn't make sense to display that info >> (i.e. if the recipient is on the same domain as the sender). >> >> Just think about how different the internet would be if email addresses >> weren't "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" but instead would be "gmail.com/drgath". That >> would in fact be your true URI where people could send messages to via >> email, could visit via HTTP to see who that person is, could chat with that >> person via XMPP by adding that user to their buddy list, could be used as an >> OpenID, etc... Social networking would have evolved much differently and >> there may not be the need for developer unfriendly silos like MySpace and >> Facebook. Social networking could be... *gasp*... distributed! We can >> finally use a "Universal Resource Identifier" to actually be a universal way >> to identify and access a person. >> >> Now, adding all of the additional modules to handle that functionality may >> or may not ever happen, but the potential is at least there. >> >> Back to Bearhug Camp... I didn't catch all of the conversation surrounding >> this namespacing/routing issue and where the conversation left off. But I >> did see Evan erase the "@http://identi.ca/username"; option and said he >> was comfortable with the other approaches. It was one of those slow-motion >> "nooooooo!" moments and I wanted to raise the issue to see what other >> developers thought. Am I crazy? >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Laconica-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Laconica-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev
