Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
? spammer ? lolI dont understand that one. It just seems to make sense to include meta data in the item element the same way we have an enclosure tag ... we all expect there to be an enclosure tag rather than saying readers should parse the body for rel=enclosure ... how is this different. It cannot be guaranteed that a post will syndicate the full text of the item ... if truely syndicate tag information with a post you'd need to have the tag information as a seperate element with in the item element ... wouldnt you? On 4/18/06, Andreas Haugstrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yeah, if you're a spammer. :o)- AndreasOn Tue, 18 Apr 2006 21:49:05 +0200, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:> well I guess because then its dependant on the feed to include the entire > post body. Not all feeds do that and in some cases you wouldnt want them> to. Wouldnt there be a few good use cases where you might want a> headline> feed (without full post body) but still have the tagging data with the > item? For this, you'd need a tag element in rss>> On 4/18/06, Andreas Haugstrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 19:50:00 +0200, David Meade < [EMAIL PROTECTED]>>> wrote: > Not to get too far off topic here but the more I think about a tag>> > extension>> > to rss the more I love the idea. It could even have optional links to >> > various clouds. Something like: [snip] > I imagine a script could be written pretty easily for use in>> most/any/all>> > blog systems to parse out rel=tag and add the rss info. And there lies the issue. Why not cut out the middle man? Have the RSS>> reader read the RelTags directly. Less things to go wrong, fewer lines>> of>> code to write. It's win-win. :o) -->> Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen>> http://www.solitude.dk/ >>> Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. Yahoo! Groups Links> --> http://www.DavidMeade.com> feed: http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed--Andreas Haugstrup Pedersenhttp://www.solitude.dk/ >Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.Yahoo! Groups Links<*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/<*> 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/-- http://www.DavidMeade.comfeed: http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Use 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.
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
actually another example...even though hypertext does not nec mean clickable links, a good example of non-html hypertext linking is a SMIL file that allows clicking visual media to go to a web page. no HTML here at all.On 4/18/06, Michael Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I think that despite the way things have transpired/evolved doesnt change the origins.since an application *can* be built and prob has been built to handle xml just as a web browser handles html that's all that is needed to be known here. admittedly, xml is used as a format for data transport.. but hypertext is an umbrella and xml does reside beneath it. On 4/18/06, David Meade < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: All you need from the Human-Computer Interface is some way of "following" links. I guess my question here is (and I ask only because you've got me thinking =P) ... HTML is a mark up language. It comes with rules (or at least universal assumptions) as to how that markup language should be rendered. Thus it choses your engine for you. (an HTML complaint browser).XML is just a data set. you can open it in notepad. Usually you open it with an application that has no user interface to the xml at all, but rather parses that data and then outputs a format with links which can be followed ... based on the data with in the xml elements. I dont think there is anything in XLM that makes a link able to be followed. And XML isn't meant at all to provide that is it? Its meant to be comsumed and if appropriate output in a mannor that humans can use. There isn't a set way to show links and make them interactive unless that data is first transformed either by XLST or some application parsing. -- http://www.DavidMeade.com feed: http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Use 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 . -- Sull http://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org -- Sullhttp://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org 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.
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
Yeah, if you're a spammer. :o) - Andreas On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 21:49:05 +0200, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > well I guess because then its dependant on the feed to include the entire > post body. Not all feeds do that and in some cases you wouldnt want them > to. Wouldnt there be a few good use cases where you might want a > headline > feed (without full post body) but still have the tagging data with the > item? For this, you'd need a tag element in rss > > On 4/18/06, Andreas Haugstrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 19:50:00 +0200, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >> > Not to get too far off topic here but the more I think about a tag >> > extension >> > to rss the more I love the idea. It could even have optional links to >> > various clouds. Something like: >> >> [snip] >> >> > I imagine a script could be written pretty easily for use in >> most/any/all >> > blog systems to parse out rel=tag and add the rss info. >> >> And there lies the issue. Why not cut out the middle man? Have the RSS >> reader read the RelTags directly. Less things to go wrong, fewer lines >> of >> code to write. It's win-win. :o) >> >> -- >> Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen >> http://www.solitude.dk/ > >> Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. >> >> >> >> Yahoo! Groups Links >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- > http://www.DavidMeade.com > feed: http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen http://www.solitude.dk/ > Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> 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: [videoblogging] Reltag support
Hello David,On 4/18/06, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: All you need from the Human-Computer Interface is some way of "following" links. I guess my question here is (and I ask only because you've got me thinking =P) ... HTML is a mark up language. It comes with rules (or at least universal assumptions) as to how that markup language should be rendered. Thus it choses your engine for you. (an HTML complaint browser).XML is just a data set. you can open it in notepad. Usually you open it with an application that has no user interface to the xml at all, but rather parses that data and then outputs a format with links which can be followed ... based on the data with in the xml elements. I dont think there is anything in XLM that makes a link able to be followed. And XML isn't meant at all to provide that is it? Its meant to be comsumed and if appropriate output in a mannor that humans can use. There isn't a set way to show links and make them interactive unless that data is first transformed either by XLST or some application parsing. Keep in mind that XML (like SGML) isn't really a format all by itself. It's more of a meta-format. People tend to create formats based on XML.Some example of formats based on XML include: XHTMLRSSAtomSVGSMILXULXSLXBLSo, just to say it explicitly, XML, all by itself, is NOT Hypertext. (In fact, XML all by itself has NO semantics associated with it. In other words, the tags have no meaning!) However, some of the formats based on XML are. (Like some of the ones I listed above.) (In those cases, the tags have actual meanings given by their specifications.)Also note that formats that have absolutely nothing to do with XML (or SGML or HTML, etc) can be Hypertext too. For example, RTF -- Rich Text Format -- is Hypertext since it has a way of "linking". (RTF is a pretty old wordprocessing format.) Newer version of PDF also qualify as Hypertext too (I think). See ya-- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ Make Television http://maketelevision.com/ 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.
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
well I guess because then its dependant on the feed to include the entire post body. Not all feeds do that and in some cases you wouldnt want them to. Wouldnt there be a few good use cases where you might want a headline feed (without full post body) but still have the tagging data with the item? For this, you'd need a tag element in rss On 4/18/06, Andreas Haugstrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 19:50:00 +0200, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:> Not to get too far off topic here but the more I think about a tag> extension > to rss the more I love the idea. It could even have optional links to> various clouds. Something like:[snip]> I imagine a script could be written pretty easily for use in most/any/all > blog systems to parse out rel=tag and add the rss info.And there lies the issue. Why not cut out the middle man? Have the RSSreader read the RelTags directly. Less things to go wrong, fewer lines ofcode to write. It's win-win. :o) --Andreas Haugstrup Pedersenhttp://www.solitude.dk/ >Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/<*> 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/-- http://www.DavidMeade.comfeed: http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed 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.
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
I think that despite the way things have transpired/evolved doesnt change the origins.since an application *can* be built and prob has been built to handle xml just as a web browser handles htmlthat's all that is needed to be known here. admittedly, xml is used as a format for data transport.. but hypertext is an umbrella and xml does reside beneath it. On 4/18/06, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: All you need from the Human-Computer Interface is some way of "following" links. I guess my question here is (and I ask only because you've got me thinking =P) ... HTML is a mark up language. It comes with rules (or at least universal assumptions) as to how that markup language should be rendered. Thus it choses your engine for you. (an HTML complaint browser).XML is just a data set. you can open it in notepad. Usually you open it with an application that has no user interface to the xml at all, but rather parses that data and then outputs a format with links which can be followed ... based on the data with in the xml elements. I dont think there is anything in XLM that makes a link able to be followed. And XML isn't meant at all to provide that is it? Its meant to be comsumed and if appropriate output in a mannor that humans can use. There isn't a set way to show links and make them interactive unless that data is first transformed either by XLST or some application parsing. -- http://www.DavidMeade.com feed: http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Use 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 . -- Sullhttp://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org 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.
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 19:50:00 +0200, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Not to get too far off topic here but the more I think about a tag > extension > to rss the more I love the idea. It could even have optional links to > various clouds. Something like: [snip] > I imagine a script could be written pretty easily for use in most/any/all > blog systems to parse out rel=tag and add the rss info. And there lies the issue. Why not cut out the middle man? Have the RSS reader read the RelTags directly. Less things to go wrong, fewer lines of code to write. It's win-win. :o) -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen http://www.solitude.dk/ > Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> 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: [videoblogging] Reltag support
On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: All you need from the Human-Computer Interface is some way of "following" links. I guess my question here is (and I ask only because you've got me thinking =P) ... HTML is a mark up language. It comes with rules (or at least universal assumptions) as to how that markup language should be rendered. Thus it choses your engine for you. (an HTML complaint browser).XML is just a data set. you can open it in notepad. Usually you open it with an application that has no user interface to the xml at all, but rather parses that data and then outputs a format with links which can be followed ... based on the data with in the xml elements. I dont think there is anything in XLM that makes a link able to be followed. And XML isn't meant at all to provide that is it? Its meant to be comsumed and if appropriate output in a mannor that humans can use. There isn't a set way to show links and make them interactive unless that data is first transformed either by XLST or some application parsing. -- http://www.DavidMeade.comfeed: http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Use 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.
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
yes, that is correct.also, just look here:http://www.w3.org/XML/LinkingOn 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,(I read what I wrote here, and I noticed that it sounds a bit rude. Please note that I am NOT trying to be rude. E-mai just sometimes makes it sound that way. But anyways)I disagree.Whether you can click on a link or not is irrelevant. ("clicking" assumes a Human-Computer Interface that uses a "mouse" or something like it.) The definition of "Hypertext" does not require it. (All you need from the Human-Computer Interface is some way of "following" links. This could even be something as exotic as a voice system. Infact, there are phone systems that are based on Hypertext formats.)
Also, you do NOT have to render RSS to HTML to get links. However, if your software uses a "browser" as your rendering "engine" then it may be the case that your software needs to do this. But this is simply because you are using a "browser" as your "engine". (There's nothing that requires you to do this.)
One could write a system totally independent of HTML for rendering RSS.Now, I will say that RSS does NOT have a ridged specification for how "rendered RSS" should look. (People are basically free to render it however they want.) But that still does not mean that you need to render it HTML.
By definition RSS is Hypertext.See yaOn 4/18/06, Joshua Kinberg
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
RSS doesn't have real links that you can click on, unless its rendered as HTML.RSS isn't hypertext. It's just data. What you do with that data is
another story, and its quite common to use XSLT to transform RSS intohypertext that can be rendered in a browser appropriately.-JoshOn 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> Hello David,>> HTML is just one example of Hypertext. (Although probably the most popular> one.)>> Both RSS and Atom are Hypertext too!
>> Basically, if you've got "links", then (by definition) you're Hypertext.>>> See ya>>> On 4/18/06, David Meade <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:> >> > perhaps but doesnt HREF actuall mean "hypertext reference" ... this> wouldnt be a html doc, and would have to point to one (maybe it points to> anohter xml doc)
> >> > URL seems to be a pretty strandard attribute in RSS ... I could see using> IRI ...> >> > eh, we'll burn that bridge if the extension is ever actuall designed. :-P
> >
> >> >> > On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux < [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:> >> > >> >> >
> > Hello,> >> >> >> >> > On 4/18/06, David Meade <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> >> > >> > > Yeah they arent really the same thing. All the ways they are different
> hit you when you try to code around them. I've treated them mostly the same> on my site, but have found myself very limited at times because of it. I've> often wished I'd written my system differently so that it made clear what
> was a category and what was a tag ... but back when I was learning the> difference I relied on Technorati to show me the way ... which may not have> been the best idea. :-P> > >> > > I like Devlon's description: Posts belong to categories. Tags belong
> to posts.> > >> > > Not to get too far off topic here but the more I think about a tag> extension to rss the more I love the idea. It could even have optional> links to various clouds. Something like:
> > >> > > > > > >
http://www.mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/
">MeFeedia> > > > url="" href="http://technorati.com/tag/videobloggingweek2006" target="_blank" >http://technorati.com/tag/videobloggingweek2006
">Technorati
> > > > http://fireant.tv/directory/tags/videobloggingweek2006?
">FireAnt> > > ... etc etc ...
> > > > >> >> >> >> > I know I'm nitpicking (yet again), but... if you want to go down that> path... I'd suggest calling that attribute "href" instead of "url". Here's
> some reasons for that:> >> >> >> > We keep on changing the name we call these things. First they were URL's.> Then they were URI's. And now they're IRI's. (There might even be a new
> name now.) So picking a name like that will, at best, make it seem dated,> and at worst, confuse people.> > "href" has much much more common usage.> > "href" is used by HTML (so this will seem familiar to people who know
> HTML).> > "href" is used by Atom (so this will seem familiar to people who know> Atom).> >> > See ya> >> >> >> >> > >
> > > I imagine a script could be written pretty easily for use in> most/any/all blog systems to parse out rel=tag and add the rss info.> > >> > >> > > Anyway ... great update to mefeedia! :-)
> > >> > > - Dave> > >> > >> > >> > > On 4/18/06, Devlon <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > > >
> > > >> > > > On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:> > > >> > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > > Hello Peter,> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > > > >> > > > > > > Just out of curiosity, why is it philosophically the wrong> appr
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
Hello,(I read what I wrote here, and I noticed that it sounds a bit rude. Please note that I am NOT trying to be rude. E-mai just sometimes makes it sound that way. But anyways)I disagree.Whether you can click on a link or not is irrelevant. ("clicking" assumes a Human-Computer Interface that uses a "mouse" or something like it.) The definition of "Hypertext" does not require it. (All you need from the Human-Computer Interface is some way of "following" links. This could even be something as exotic as a voice system. Infact, there are phone systems that are based on Hypertext formats.)
Also, you do NOT have to render RSS to HTML to get links. However, if your software uses a "browser" as your rendering "engine" then it may be the case that your software needs to do this. But this is simply because you are using a "browser" as your "engine". (There's nothing that requires you to do this.)
One could write a system totally independent of HTML for rendering RSS.Now, I will say that RSS does NOT have a ridged specification for how "rendered RSS" should look. (People are basically free to render it however they want.) But that still does not mean that you need to render it HTML.
By definition RSS is Hypertext.See yaOn 4/18/06, Joshua Kinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
RSS doesn't have real links that you can click on, unless its rendered as HTML.RSS isn't hypertext. It's just data. What you do with that data is
another story, and its quite common to use XSLT to transform RSS intohypertext that can be rendered in a browser appropriately.-JoshOn 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> Hello David,>> HTML is just one example of Hypertext. (Although probably the most popular> one.)>> Both RSS and Atom are Hypertext too!
>> Basically, if you've got "links", then (by definition) you're Hypertext.>>> See ya>>> On 4/18/06, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:> >> > perhaps but doesnt HREF actuall mean "hypertext reference" ... this> wouldnt be a html doc, and would have to point to one (maybe it points to> anohter xml doc)
> >> > URL seems to be a pretty strandard attribute in RSS ... I could see using> IRI ...> >> > eh, we'll burn that bridge if the extension is ever actuall designed. :-P> >
> >> >> > On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> >> > >> >> >
> > Hello,> >> >> >> >> > On 4/18/06, David Meade < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> >> > >> > > Yeah they arent really the same thing. All the ways they are different
> hit you when you try to code around them. I've treated them mostly the same> on my site, but have found myself very limited at times because of it. I've> often wished I'd written my system differently so that it made clear what
> was a category and what was a tag ... but back when I was learning the> difference I relied on Technorati to show me the way ... which may not have> been the best idea. :-P> > >> > > I like Devlon's description: Posts belong to categories. Tags belong
> to posts.> > >> > > Not to get too far off topic here but the more I think about a tag> extension to rss the more I love the idea. It could even have optional> links to various clouds. Something like:
> > >> > > > > > > http://www.mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/
">MeFeedia> > > > url="" href="http://technorati.com/tag/videobloggingweek2006">http://technorati.com/tag/videobloggingweek2006">Technorati
> > > > http://fireant.tv/directory/tags/videobloggingweek2006?">FireAnt> > > ... etc etc ...
> > > > >> >> >> >> > I know I'm nitpicking (yet again), but... if you want to go down that> path... I'd suggest calling that attribute "href" instead of "url". Here's
> some reasons for that:> >> >> >> > We keep on changing the name we call these things. First they were URL's.> Then they were URI's. And now they're IRI's. (There might even be a new
> name now.) So picking a name like that will, at best, make it seem dated,> and at worst, confuse people.> > "href" has much much more common usage.> > "href" is used by HTML (so this will seem familiar to people who know
> HTML).> > "href" is used by Atom (so this will seem familiar to people who know> Atom).> >> > See ya> >> >> >> >> > >
> > > I imagine a script could be written pretty easily for use in> most/any/all blog systems to parse out rel=tag and add the rss info.> > >> > >> > > Anyway ... great update to mefeedia! :-)
> > >> > > - Dave> > >> > >> > >> > > On 4/18/06, Devlon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > > >
> > > >> > > > On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:> > > >> > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > > Hello Peter,> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > > > >> > > > > > > Just out of curiosity, why is it philosophically the wrong> approach to use> > > > > > > the RSS category element?
> > > > > >> > > > > > Because a category is not the same as a tag.. Tags are used> > > > > > descriptively, categorie
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
html, is code. view source. can you click on links?a 'browser app' translates the code to generate hypertext.the same can occur with xml and 'reader apps'On 4/18/06, Joshua Kinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: RSS doesn't have real links that you can click on, unless its rendered as HTML.RSS isn't hypertext. It's just data. What you do with that data isanother story, and its quite common to use XSLT to transform RSS into hypertext that can be rendered in a browser appropriately.-JoshOn 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> Hello David, >> HTML is just one example of Hypertext. (Although probably the most popular> one.)>> Both RSS and Atom are Hypertext too!>> Basically, if you've got "links", then (by definition) you're Hypertext. >>> See ya>>> On 4/18/06, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> >> > perhaps but doesnt HREF actuall mean "hypertext reference" ... this > wouldnt be a html doc, and would have to point to one (maybe it points to> anohter xml doc)> >> > URL seems to be a pretty strandard attribute in RSS ... I could see using> IRI ... > >> > eh, we'll burn that bridge if the extension is ever actuall designed. :-P> >> >> >> > On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> >> > >> >> >> > Hello,> >> >> >> >> > On 4/18/06, David Meade < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> >> > >> > > Yeah they arent really the same thing. All the ways they are different> hit you when you try to code around them. I've treated them mostly the same > on my site, but have found myself very limited at times because of it. I've> often wished I'd written my system differently so that it made clear what> was a category and what was a tag ... but back when I was learning the > difference I relied on Technorati to show me the way ... which may not have> been the best idea. :-P> > >> > > I like Devlon's description: Posts belong to categories. Tags belong > to posts.> > >> > > Not to get too far off topic here but the more I think about a tag> extension to rss the more I love the idea. It could even have optional> links to various clouds. Something like: > > >> > > > > > > http://www.mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/ ">MeFeedia> > > > url="" href="http://technorati.com/tag/videobloggingweek2006">http://technorati.com/tag/videobloggingweek2006">Technorati > > > > http://fireant.tv/directory/tags/videobloggingweek2006?">FireAnt> > > ... etc etc ... > > > > >> >> >> >> > I know I'm nitpicking (yet again), but... if you want to go down that> path... I'd suggest calling that attribute "href" instead of "url". Here's > some reasons for that:> >> >> >> > We keep on changing the name we call these things. First they were URL's.> Then they were URI's. And now they're IRI's. (There might even be a new > name now.) So picking a name like that will, at best, make it seem dated,> and at worst, confuse people.> > "href" has much much more common usage.> > "href" is used by HTML (so this will seem familiar to people who know > HTML).> > "href" is used by Atom (so this will seem familiar to people who know> Atom).> >> > See ya> >> >> >> >> > > > > > I imagine a script could be written pretty easily for use in> most/any/all blog systems to parse out rel=tag and add the rss info.> > >> > >> > > Anyway ... great update to mefeedia! :-) > > >> > > - Dave> > >> > >> > >> > > On 4/18/06, Devlon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > > > > > > >> > > > On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Hello Peter,> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > > > >> > > > > > > Just out of curiosity, why is it philosophically the wrong> approach to use> > > > > > > the RSS category element? > > > > > >> > > > > > Because a category is not the same as a tag.. Tags are used> > > > > > descriptively, categories are often things like "Announcements", > > > > > > things that aren't really tags. I am quite wary about using tags> in> > > > > > the wrong way... But there is no right answer, of course.> > > > > > > > > > > > Peter> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > Hmmm... I've always considered them to be exactly the same thing. > They're just labels you are labelling things with.> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > I think the scope is different. Tags are granular, portions of a post > can be tagged...categories are like 'containers'. Posts belong to a> categorytags belong to a post.> > > >> > > > That's just my read on it though.> > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > I didn't think it mattered whether you call them "tags" or> "categories" or "keywords". They all really seem the same. (It's up to you > in what kind of "meaning" you put behind them.)> > > > >> > > > > The only difference I've seen with this type of stuff is whether the> "creator" or the "users" tagged this stuff. (But, what we're talking about > here is "creator" tagged stuff.)> > > > >> > > >> > >> >>> [...]
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
You wouldnt need the link portion at all I guess ... certainly the cloud services themselves woulodnt need it.I just figured it would be easier for a post to spell out what coulds its a part of than for every reader out there to revamp/recode and try to maintain/built-out links to all the possible clouds out there that exist now or will exist in coming hours. :-P I guess my thinking was cloud services and directories would only need the tag name, but the extension could allow for the post to state the clouds it (knowningly) is a part of ... so that when displaying that that post it would be easy for very simple scripts to publish those links with the post rather than try to decide if they will post no links or try to come up with all possible clouds etc... On 4/18/06, Joshua Kinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Why would you need multiple tag URIs with the same tagname but for different tag services. In theory, you would only need one tagname and any consuming service should pick it up.FYI, relTag support is something on our roadmap as well and should be implemented in the FireAnt directory in the not too distant future... eventually, I would expect many sites and services that consume RSS and also have tagging to support relTag. -JoshOn 4/18/06, David Meade < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: perhaps but doesnt HREF actuall mean "hypertext reference" ... this wouldnt be a html doc, and would have to point to one (maybe it points to anohter xml doc)URL seems to be a pretty strandard attribute in RSS ... I could see using IRI ... eh, we'll burn that bridge if the extension is ever actuall designed. :-P On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello,On 4/18/06, David Meade < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yeah they arent really the same thing. All the ways they are different hit you when you try to code around them. I've treated them mostly the same on my site, but have found myself very limited at times because of it. I've often wished I'd written my system differently so that it made clear what was a category and what was a tag ... but back when I was learning the difference I relied on Technorati to show me the way ... which may not have been the best idea. :-P I like Devlon's description: Posts belong to categories. Tags belong to posts.Not to get too far off topic here but the more I think about a tag extension to rss the more I love the idea. It could even have optional links to various clouds. Something like: http://www.mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/">MeFeedia http://technorati.com/tag/videobloggingweek2006">Technorati http://fireant.tv/directory/tags/videobloggingweek2006?">FireAnt ... etc etc ... I know I'm nitpicking (yet again), but... if you want to go down that path... I'd suggest calling that attribute "href" instead of "url". Here's some reasons for that: We keep on changing the name we call these things. First they were URL's. Then they were URI's. And now they're IRI's. (There might even be a new name now.) So picking a name like that will, at best, make it seem dated, and at worst, confuse people. "href" has much much more common usage."href" is used by HTML (so this will seem familiar to people who know HTML). "href" is used by Atom (so this will seem familiar to people who know Atom). See ya I imagine a script could be written pretty easily for use in most/any/all blog systems to parse out rel=tag and add the rss info. Anyway ... great update to mefeedia! :-)- Dave On 4/18/06, Devlon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: Hello Peter,On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just out of curiosity, why is it philosophically the wrong approach to use> the RSS category element?Because a category is not the same as a tag.. Tags are useddescriptively, categories are often things like "Announcements", things that aren't really tags. I am quite wary about using tags inthe wrong way... But there is no right answer, of course.Peter Hmmm... I've always considered them to be exactly the same thing. They're just labels you are labelling things with. I think the scope is different. Tags are granular, portions of a post can be tagged...categories are like 'containers'. Posts belong to a categorytags belong to a post. That's just my read on it though. I didn't think it mattered whether you call them "tags" or "categories" or "keywords". They all really seem the same. (It's up to you in what kind of "meaning" you put behind them.) The only difference I've seen with this type of stuff is whether the "creator" or the "users" tagged this stuff. (But, what we're talking about here is "creator" tagged stuff.) See ya-- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc .charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
an ambiguous service picking up a tag *and* providing output links for 'users' to go to different services where relTag is supported wouldnt nec be illogical. On 4/18/06, Joshua Kinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Why would you need multiple tag URIs with the same tagname but for different tag services. In theory, you would only need one tagname and any consuming service should pick it up.FYI, relTag support is something on our roadmap as well and should be implemented in the FireAnt directory in the not too distant future... eventually, I would expect many sites and services that consume RSS and also have tagging to support relTag. -JoshOn 4/18/06, David Meade < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: perhaps but doesnt HREF actuall mean "hypertext reference" ... this wouldnt be a html doc, and would have to point to one (maybe it points to anohter xml doc)URL seems to be a pretty strandard attribute in RSS ... I could see using IRI ... eh, we'll burn that bridge if the extension is ever actuall designed. :-P On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello,On 4/18/06, David Meade < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yeah they arent really the same thing. All the ways they are different hit you when you try to code around them. I've treated them mostly the same on my site, but have found myself very limited at times because of it. I've often wished I'd written my system differently so that it made clear what was a category and what was a tag ... but back when I was learning the difference I relied on Technorati to show me the way ... which may not have been the best idea. :-P I like Devlon's description: Posts belong to categories. Tags belong to posts.Not to get too far off topic here but the more I think about a tag extension to rss the more I love the idea. It could even have optional links to various clouds. Something like: http://www.mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/">MeFeedia http://technorati.com/tag/videobloggingweek2006">Technorati http://fireant.tv/directory/tags/videobloggingweek2006?">FireAnt ... etc etc ... I know I'm nitpicking (yet again), but... if you want to go down that path... I'd suggest calling that attribute "href" instead of "url". Here's some reasons for that: We keep on changing the name we call these things. First they were URL's. Then they were URI's. And now they're IRI's. (There might even be a new name now.) So picking a name like that will, at best, make it seem dated, and at worst, confuse people. "href" has much much more common usage."href" is used by HTML (so this will seem familiar to people who know HTML). "href" is used by Atom (so this will seem familiar to people who know Atom). See ya I imagine a script could be written pretty easily for use in most/any/all blog systems to parse out rel=tag and add the rss info. Anyway ... great update to mefeedia! :-)- Dave On 4/18/06, Devlon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: Hello Peter,On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just out of curiosity, why is it philosophically the wrong approach to use> the RSS category element?Because a category is not the same as a tag.. Tags are useddescriptively, categories are often things like "Announcements", things that aren't really tags. I am quite wary about using tags inthe wrong way... But there is no right answer, of course.Peter Hmmm... I've always considered them to be exactly the same thing. They're just labels you are labelling things with. I think the scope is different. Tags are granular, portions of a post can be tagged...categories are like 'containers'. Posts belong to a categorytags belong to a post. That's just my read on it though. I didn't think it mattered whether you call them "tags" or "categories" or "keywords". They all really seem the same. (It's up to you in what kind of "meaning" you put behind them.) The only difference I've seen with this type of stuff is whether the "creator" or the "users" tagged this stuff. (But, what we're talking about here is "creator" tagged stuff.) See ya-- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc .charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ Make Television http://maketelevision.com/ [...] -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ Make Televisionhttp://maketelevision.com/ SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
RSS doesn't have real links that you can click on, unless its rendered as HTML. RSS isn't hypertext. It's just data. What you do with that data is another story, and its quite common to use XSLT to transform RSS into hypertext that can be rendered in a browser appropriately. -Josh On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello David, > > HTML is just one example of Hypertext. (Although probably the most popular > one.) > > Both RSS and Atom are Hypertext too! > > Basically, if you've got "links", then (by definition) you're Hypertext. > > > See ya > > > On 4/18/06, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > perhaps but doesnt HREF actuall mean "hypertext reference" ... this > wouldnt be a html doc, and would have to point to one (maybe it points to > anohter xml doc) > > > > URL seems to be a pretty strandard attribute in RSS ... I could see using > IRI ... > > > > eh, we'll burn that bridge if the extension is ever actuall designed. :-P > > > > > > > > On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > On 4/18/06, David Meade < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Yeah they arent really the same thing. All the ways they are different > hit you when you try to code around them. I've treated them mostly the same > on my site, but have found myself very limited at times because of it. I've > often wished I'd written my system differently so that it made clear what > was a category and what was a tag ... but back when I was learning the > difference I relied on Technorati to show me the way ... which may not have > been the best idea. :-P > > > > > > I like Devlon's description: Posts belong to categories. Tags belong > to posts. > > > > > > Not to get too far off topic here but the more I think about a tag > extension to rss the more I love the idea. It could even have optional > links to various clouds. Something like: > > > > > > > > > http://www.mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/";>MeFeedia > > > url="http://technorati.com/tag/videobloggingweek2006";>Technorati > > > http://fireant.tv/directory/tags/videobloggingweek2006?";>FireAnt > > > ... etc etc ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know I'm nitpicking (yet again), but... if you want to go down that > path... I'd suggest calling that attribute "href" instead of "url". Here's > some reasons for that: > > > > > > > > We keep on changing the name we call these things. First they were URL's. > Then they were URI's. And now they're IRI's. (There might even be a new > name now.) So picking a name like that will, at best, make it seem dated, > and at worst, confuse people. > > "href" has much much more common usage. > > "href" is used by HTML (so this will seem familiar to people who know > HTML). > > "href" is used by Atom (so this will seem familiar to people who know > Atom). > > > > See ya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I imagine a script could be written pretty easily for use in > most/any/all blog systems to parse out rel=tag and add the rss info. > > > > > > > > > Anyway ... great update to mefeedia! :-) > > > > > > - Dave > > > > > > > > > > > > On 4/18/06, Devlon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello Peter, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Just out of curiosity, why is it philosophically the wrong > approach to use > > > > > > > the RSS category element? > > > > > > > > > > > > Because a category is not the same as a tag.. Tags are used > > > > > > descriptively, categories are often things like "Announcements", > > > > > > things that aren't really tags. I am quite wary about using tags > in > > > > > > the wrong way... But there is no right answer, of course. > > > > > > > > > > > > Peter > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hmmm... I've always considered them to be exactly the same thing. > They're just labels you are labelling things with. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the scope is different. Tags are granular, portions of a post > can be tagged...categories are like 'containers'. Posts belong to a > categorytags belong to a post. > > > > > > > > That's just my read on it though. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I didn't think it mattered whether you call them "tags" or > "categories" or "keywords". They all really seem the same. (It's up to you > in what kind of "meaning" you put behind them.) > > > > > > > > > > The only difference I've seen with this type of stuff is whether the > "creator" or the "users" tagged this stuff. (But, what we're talking about > here is "creator" tagged stuff.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > -- > Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. > > charles @ reptile.ca > supercanadian @ gmail.com > > developer weblog: http:/
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
Hello David,HTML is just one example of Hypertext. (Although probably the most popular one.)Both RSS and Atom are Hypertext too!Basically, if you've got "links", then (by definition) you're Hypertext. See yaOn 4/18/06, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: perhaps but doesnt HREF actuall mean "hypertext reference" ... this wouldnt be a html doc, and would have to point to one (maybe it points to anohter xml doc)URL seems to be a pretty strandard attribute in RSS ... I could see using IRI ... eh, we'll burn that bridge if the extension is ever actuall designed. :-POn 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello,On 4/18/06, David Meade < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yeah they arent really the same thing. All the ways they are different hit you when you try to code around them. I've treated them mostly the same on my site, but have found myself very limited at times because of it. I've often wished I'd written my system differently so that it made clear what was a category and what was a tag ... but back when I was learning the difference I relied on Technorati to show me the way ... which may not have been the best idea. :-P I like Devlon's description: Posts belong to categories. Tags belong to posts.Not to get too far off topic here but the more I think about a tag extension to rss the more I love the idea. It could even have optional links to various clouds. Something like: http://www.mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/">MeFeedia http://technorati.com/tag/videobloggingweek2006">Technorati http://fireant.tv/directory/tags/videobloggingweek2006?">FireAnt ... etc etc ... I know I'm nitpicking (yet again), but... if you want to go down that path... I'd suggest calling that attribute "href" instead of "url". Here's some reasons for that: We keep on changing the name we call these things. First they were URL's. Then they were URI's. And now they're IRI's. (There might even be a new name now.) So picking a name like that will, at best, make it seem dated, and at worst, confuse people. "href" has much much more common usage."href" is used by HTML (so this will seem familiar to people who know HTML)."href" is used by Atom (so this will seem familiar to people who know Atom). See ya I imagine a script could be written pretty easily for use in most/any/all blog systems to parse out rel=tag and add the rss info. Anyway ... great update to mefeedia! :-)- Dave On 4/18/06, Devlon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: Hello Peter,On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just out of curiosity, why is it philosophically the wrong approach to use> the RSS category element?Because a category is not the same as a tag.. Tags are useddescriptively, categories are often things like "Announcements", things that aren't really tags. I am quite wary about using tags inthe wrong way... But there is no right answer, of course.Peter Hmmm... I've always considered them to be exactly the same thing. They're just labels you are labelling things with. I think the scope is different. Tags are granular, portions of a post can be tagged...categories are like 'containers'. Posts belong to a categorytags belong to a post. That's just my read on it though. I didn't think it mattered whether you call them "tags" or "categories" or "keywords". They all really seem the same. (It's up to you in what kind of "meaning" you put behind them.) The only difference I've seen with this type of stuff is whether the "creator" or the "users" tagged this stuff. (But, what we're talking about here is "creator" tagged stuff.) [...] -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.casupercanadian @ gmail.comdeveloper weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/___ Make Televisionhttp://maketelevision.com/ 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.
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
Why would you need multiple tag URIs with the same tagname but for different tag services. In theory, you would only need one tagname and any consuming service should pick it up.FYI, relTag support is something on our roadmap as well and should be implemented in the FireAnt directory in the not too distant future... eventually, I would expect many sites and services that consume RSS and also have tagging to support relTag. -JoshOn 4/18/06, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: perhaps but doesnt HREF actuall mean "hypertext reference" ... this wouldnt be a html doc, and would have to point to one (maybe it points to anohter xml doc)URL seems to be a pretty strandard attribute in RSS ... I could see using IRI ... eh, we'll burn that bridge if the extension is ever actuall designed. :-P On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello,On 4/18/06, David Meade < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yeah they arent really the same thing. All the ways they are different hit you when you try to code around them. I've treated them mostly the same on my site, but have found myself very limited at times because of it. I've often wished I'd written my system differently so that it made clear what was a category and what was a tag ... but back when I was learning the difference I relied on Technorati to show me the way ... which may not have been the best idea. :-P I like Devlon's description: Posts belong to categories. Tags belong to posts.Not to get too far off topic here but the more I think about a tag extension to rss the more I love the idea. It could even have optional links to various clouds. Something like: http://www.mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/">MeFeedia http://technorati.com/tag/videobloggingweek2006">Technorati http://fireant.tv/directory/tags/videobloggingweek2006?">FireAnt ... etc etc ... I know I'm nitpicking (yet again), but... if you want to go down that path... I'd suggest calling that attribute "href" instead of "url". Here's some reasons for that: We keep on changing the name we call these things. First they were URL's. Then they were URI's. And now they're IRI's. (There might even be a new name now.) So picking a name like that will, at best, make it seem dated, and at worst, confuse people. "href" has much much more common usage."href" is used by HTML (so this will seem familiar to people who know HTML)."href" is used by Atom (so this will seem familiar to people who know Atom). See ya I imagine a script could be written pretty easily for use in most/any/all blog systems to parse out rel=tag and add the rss info. Anyway ... great update to mefeedia! :-)- Dave On 4/18/06, Devlon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: Hello Peter,On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just out of curiosity, why is it philosophically the wrong approach to use> the RSS category element?Because a category is not the same as a tag.. Tags are useddescriptively, categories are often things like "Announcements", things that aren't really tags. I am quite wary about using tags inthe wrong way... But there is no right answer, of course.Peter Hmmm... I've always considered them to be exactly the same thing. They're just labels you are labelling things with. I think the scope is different. Tags are granular, portions of a post can be tagged...categories are like 'containers'. Posts belong to a categorytags belong to a post. That's just my read on it though. I didn't think it mattered whether you call them "tags" or "categories" or "keywords". They all really seem the same. (It's up to you in what kind of "meaning" you put behind them.) The only difference I've seen with this type of stuff is whether the "creator" or the "users" tagged this stuff. (But, what we're talking about here is "creator" tagged stuff.) See ya-- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc .charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ Make Television http://maketelevision.com/ [...] -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ Make Televisionhttp://maketelevision.com/ SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Use YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
perhaps but doesnt HREF actuall mean "hypertext reference" ... this wouldnt be a html doc, and would have to point to one (maybe it points to anohter xml doc)URL seems to be a pretty strandard attribute in RSS ... I could see using IRI ... eh, we'll burn that bridge if the extension is ever actuall designed. :-POn 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello,On 4/18/06, David Meade < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yeah they arent really the same thing. All the ways they are different hit you when you try to code around them. I've treated them mostly the same on my site, but have found myself very limited at times because of it. I've often wished I'd written my system differently so that it made clear what was a category and what was a tag ... but back when I was learning the difference I relied on Technorati to show me the way ... which may not have been the best idea. :-P I like Devlon's description: Posts belong to categories. Tags belong to posts.Not to get too far off topic here but the more I think about a tag extension to rss the more I love the idea. It could even have optional links to various clouds. Something like: http://www.mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/">MeFeedia http://technorati.com/tag/videobloggingweek2006">Technorati http://fireant.tv/directory/tags/videobloggingweek2006?">FireAnt ... etc etc ... I know I'm nitpicking (yet again), but... if you want to go down that path... I'd suggest calling that attribute "href" instead of "url". Here's some reasons for that: We keep on changing the name we call these things. First they were URL's. Then they were URI's. And now they're IRI's. (There might even be a new name now.) So picking a name like that will, at best, make it seem dated, and at worst, confuse people. "href" has much much more common usage."href" is used by HTML (so this will seem familiar to people who know HTML)."href" is used by Atom (so this will seem familiar to people who know Atom). See ya I imagine a script could be written pretty easily for use in most/any/all blog systems to parse out rel=tag and add the rss info. Anyway ... great update to mefeedia! :-)- DaveOn 4/18/06, Devlon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: Hello Peter,On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just out of curiosity, why is it philosophically the wrong approach to use> the RSS category element?Because a category is not the same as a tag.. Tags are useddescriptively, categories are often things like "Announcements", things that aren't really tags. I am quite wary about using tags inthe wrong way... But there is no right answer, of course.Peter Hmmm... I've always considered them to be exactly the same thing. They're just labels you are labelling things with. I think the scope is different. Tags are granular, portions of a post can be tagged...categories are like 'containers'. Posts belong to a categorytags belong to a post. That's just my read on it though. I didn't think it mattered whether you call them "tags" or "categories" or "keywords". They all really seem the same. (It's up to you in what kind of "meaning" you put behind them.) The only difference I've seen with this type of stuff is whether the "creator" or the "users" tagged this stuff. (But, what we're talking about here is "creator" tagged stuff.) See ya-- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc .charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ Make Television http://maketelevision.com/ [...] -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ Make Televisionhttp://maketelevision.com/ SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Use 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 . -- http://www.DavidMeade.comfeed: http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Use YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, s
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
Hello,On 4/18/06, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yeah they arent really the same thing. All the ways they are different hit you when you try to code around them. I've treated them mostly the same on my site, but have found myself very limited at times because of it. I've often wished I'd written my system differently so that it made clear what was a category and what was a tag ... but back when I was learning the difference I relied on Technorati to show me the way ... which may not have been the best idea. :-P I like Devlon's description: Posts belong to categories. Tags belong to posts.Not to get too far off topic here but the more I think about a tag extension to rss the more I love the idea. It could even have optional links to various clouds. Something like: http://www.mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/">MeFeedia http://technorati.com/tag/videobloggingweek2006">Technorati http://fireant.tv/directory/tags/videobloggingweek2006?">FireAnt ... etc etc ... I know I'm nitpicking (yet again), but... if you want to go down that path... I'd suggest calling that attribute "href" instead of "url". Here's some reasons for that: We keep on changing the name we call these things. First they were URL's. Then they were URI's. And now they're IRI's. (There might even be a new name now.) So picking a name like that will, at best, make it seem dated, and at worst, confuse people. "href" has much much more common usage."href" is used by HTML (so this will seem familiar to people who know HTML)."href" is used by Atom (so this will seem familiar to people who know Atom). See ya I imagine a script could be written pretty easily for use in most/any/all blog systems to parse out rel=tag and add the rss info. Anyway ... great update to mefeedia! :-)- DaveOn 4/18/06, Devlon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello Peter,On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just out of curiosity, why is it philosophically the wrong approach to use> the RSS category element?Because a category is not the same as a tag.. Tags are useddescriptively, categories are often things like "Announcements", things that aren't really tags. I am quite wary about using tags inthe wrong way... But there is no right answer, of course.Peter Hmmm... I've always considered them to be exactly the same thing. They're just labels you are labelling things with. I think the scope is different. Tags are granular, portions of a post can be tagged...categories are like 'containers'. Posts belong to a categorytags belong to a post. That's just my read on it though. I didn't think it mattered whether you call them "tags" or "categories" or "keywords". They all really seem the same. (It's up to you in what kind of "meaning" you put behind them.) The only difference I've seen with this type of stuff is whether the "creator" or the "users" tagged this stuff. (But, what we're talking about here is "creator" tagged stuff.) See ya-- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc .charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ Make Television http://maketelevision.com/ [...]-- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.casupercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ Make Televisionhttp://maketelevision.com/ SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Use 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.
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
Yeah they arent really the same thing. All the ways they are different hit you when you try to code around them. I've treated them mostly the same on my site, but have found myself very limited at times because of it. I've often wished I'd written my system differently so that it made clear what was a category and what was a tag ... but back when I was learning the difference I relied on Technorati to show me the way ... which may not have been the best idea. :-P I like Devlon's description: Posts belong to categories. Tags belong to posts.Not to get too far off topic here but the more I think about a tag extension to rss the more I love the idea. It could even have optional links to various clouds. Something like: http://www.mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/">MeFeedia http://technorati.com/tag/videobloggingweek2006">Technorati http://fireant.tv/directory/tags/videobloggingweek2006?">FireAnt ... etc etc ... I imagine a script could be written pretty easily for use in most/any/all blog systems to parse out rel=tag and add the rss info. Anyway ... great update to mefeedia! :-)- DaveOn 4/18/06, Devlon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello Peter,On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just out of curiosity, why is it philosophically the wrong approach to use> the RSS category element?Because a category is not the same as a tag.. Tags are useddescriptively, categories are often things like "Announcements", things that aren't really tags. I am quite wary about using tags inthe wrong way... But there is no right answer, of course.Peter Hmmm... I've always considered them to be exactly the same thing. They're just labels you are labelling things with. I think the scope is different. Tags are granular, portions of a post can be tagged...categories are like 'containers'. Posts belong to a categorytags belong to a post. That's just my read on it though. I didn't think it mattered whether you call them "tags" or "categories" or "keywords". They all really seem the same. (It's up to you in what kind of "meaning" you put behind them.) The only difference I've seen with this type of stuff is whether the "creator" or the "users" tagged this stuff. (But, what we're talking about here is "creator" tagged stuff.) See ya-- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc .charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ Make Television http://maketelevision.com/ SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Use 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 . -- ~Devlon http://loadedpun.com | http://mefeedia.com http://8bitme.blogspot.com | http://devlonduthie.com SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Use 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 . -- http://www.DavidMeade.comfeed: http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Use 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.
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
On 4/18/06, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello Peter,On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just out of curiosity, why is it philosophically the wrong approach to use> the RSS category element?Because a category is not the same as a tag.. Tags are useddescriptively, categories are often things like "Announcements", things that aren't really tags. I am quite wary about using tags inthe wrong way... But there is no right answer, of course.Peter Hmmm... I've always considered them to be exactly the same thing. They're just labels you are labelling things with. I think the scope is different. Tags are granular, portions of a post can be tagged...categories are like 'containers'. Posts belong to a categorytags belong to a post.That's just my read on it though. I didn't think it mattered whether you call them "tags" or "categories" or "keywords". They all really seem the same. (It's up to you in what kind of "meaning" you put behind them.) The only difference I've seen with this type of stuff is whether the "creator" or the "users" tagged this stuff. (But, what we're talking about here is "creator" tagged stuff.) See ya-- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc .charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ Make Television http://maketelevision.com/ SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Use 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 . -- ~Devlonhttp://loadedpun.com | http://mefeedia.com http://8bitme.blogspot.com | http://devlonduthie.com SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Use 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.
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
Hello Peter,On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just out of curiosity, why is it philosophically the wrong approach to use> the RSS category element?Because a category is not the same as a tag.. Tags are useddescriptively, categories are often things like "Announcements", things that aren't really tags. I am quite wary about using tags inthe wrong way... But there is no right answer, of course.PeterHmmm... I've always considered them to be exactly the same thing. They're just labels you are labelling things with. I didn't think it mattered whether you call them "tags" or "categories" or "keywords". They all really seem the same. (It's up to you in what kind of "meaning" you put behind them.) The only difference I've seen with this type of stuff is whether the "creator" or the "users" tagged this stuff. (But, what we're talking about here is "creator" tagged stuff.) See ya-- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc .charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/___ Make Televisionhttp://maketelevision.com/ SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Use 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.
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
> Just out of curiosity, why is it philosophically the wrong approach to use > the RSS category element? Because a category is not the same as a tag.. Tags are used descriptively, categories are often things like "Announcements", things that aren't really tags. I am quite wary about using tags in the wrong way... But there is no right answer, of course. Peter Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> 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: [videoblogging] Reltag support
Nice! Thanks, Peter...You just improved the vlogosphere :)sullOn 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Hi all,From today, Mefeedia supports the rel=tag standard. This means that you can put tags in your blogpost, and your video willbe tagged automatically at Mefeedia. No more having to come toMefeedia just to tag all your videos.To add tags, just add something like the following to your blogpost: http://mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/">videobloggingweek2006As with the other sites that support this standard, the link can go to any website, like Technorati, Wikipedia or Mefeedia, as long as thelast part of the link is the same as the tag.We also used our Powers (tm) to run the script back in time, to thebeginning of 2006, so if you were already using tags in your blogposts, all your videos have been tagged since January 2006. So allyour videoblogging2006 tags are in Mefeedia now, whether you taggedthem in Mefeedia or not: http://mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/Let me know if you have any questions.Cheers,PeterYahoo! Groups Links<*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/<*> 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/-- Sull http://vlogdir.com http://SpreadTheMedia.org SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Use 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.
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
Hello Peter,On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: No, we don't support the element yet. Two reasons:1) I think it's philosophically the wrong approach, andJust out of curiosity, why is it philosophically the wrong approach to use the RSS category element? See ya 2) It's another day of coding and I don't have time right now, gotta finish some consulting work :)Not to say we won't, if I find some time I might implement that.Cheers!PeterOn 4/18/06, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:> Thats awesome. Will it also tag posts with the item's elements> in the feed? I typically rely on these for technorati tagging.>>> On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> >> Hi all,> From today, Mefeedia supports the rel=tag standard.>> This means that you can put tags in your blogpost, and your video will > be tagged automatically at Mefeedia. No more having to come to> Mefeedia just to tag all your videos.>> To add tags, just add something like the following to your blogpost:>> > href="" href="http://mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/">http://mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/> ">videobloggingweek2006>> As with the other sites that support this standard, the link can go to > any website, like Technorati, Wikipedia or Mefeedia, as long as the> last part of the link is the same as the tag.>> We also used our Powers (tm) to run the script back in time, to the> beginning of 2006, so if you were already using tags in your > blogposts, all your videos have been tagged since January 2006. So all> your videoblogging2006 tags are in Mefeedia now, whether you tagged> them in Mefeedia or not:> http://mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/>> Let me know if you have any questions.>> Cheers,> Peter[...] -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.casupercanadian @ gmail.comdeveloper weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/___ Make Televisionhttp://maketelevision.com/ 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.
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
I think you're right, we need a tag extension. But the problem then is: how many people use it? I usually just go with whatever has the broadest support... Peter On 4/18/06, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ah ok. I may rework how I do most of my tags one day although not today > for the same reason #2 you gave. :-) I only did it that way because for a > while Technorati really strongly pushed that method. It's still listed as > their #1 way to tag items, although they seem to have moved more fully into > the rel=tag camp. > > what we really need is a tag extension for rss (seperate from category) :-P > > > On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > No, we don't support the element yet. Two reasons: > 1) I think it's philosophically the wrong approach, and > 2) It's another day of coding and I don't have time right now, gotta > finish some consulting work :) > > Not to say we won't, if I find some time I might implement that. > > Cheers! > Peter > > On 4/18/06, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thats awesome. Will it also tag posts with the item's > elements > > in the feed? I typically rely on these for technorati tagging. > > > > > > On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > From today, Mefeedia supports the rel=tag standard. > > > > This means that you can put tags in your blogpost, and your video will > > be tagged automatically at Mefeedia. No more having to come to > > Mefeedia just to tag all your videos. > > > > To add tags, just add something like the following to your blogpost: > > > > > href=" http://mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/ > > ">videobloggingweek2006 > > > > As with the other sites that support this standard, the link can go to > > any website, like Technorati, Wikipedia or Mefeedia, as long as the > > last part of the link is the same as the tag. > > > > We also used our Powers (tm) to run the script back in time, to the > > beginning of 2006, so if you were already using tags in your > > blogposts, all your videos have been tagged since January 2006. So all > > your videoblogging2006 tags are in Mefeedia now, whether you tagged > > them in Mefeedia or not: > > http://mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/ > > > > Let me know if you have any questions. > > > > Cheers, > > Peter > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > http://www.DavidMeade.com > > feed: http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > http://www.DavidMeade.com > feed: http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed > > > > > 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. > > > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> 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: [videoblogging] Reltag support
ah ok. I may rework how I do most of my tags one day although not today for the same reason #2 you gave. :-) I only did it that way because for a while Technorati really strongly pushed that method. It's still listed as their #1 way to tag items, although they seem to have moved more fully into the rel=tag camp. what we really need is a tag extension for rss (seperate from category) :-POn 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:No, we don't support the element yet. Two reasons: 1) I think it's philosophically the wrong approach, and2) It's another day of coding and I don't have time right now, gottafinish some consulting work :)Not to say we won't, if I find some time I might implement that. Cheers!PeterOn 4/18/06, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> Thats awesome. Will it also tag posts with the item's elements > in the feed? I typically rely on these for technorati tagging.>>> On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > > Hi all,> From today, Mefeedia supports the rel=tag standard.>> This means that you can put tags in your blogpost, and your video will> be tagged automatically at Mefeedia. No more having to come to > Mefeedia just to tag all your videos.>> To add tags, just add something like the following to your blogpost:>> > href="" href="http://mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/"> http://mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/> ">videobloggingweek2006>> As with the other sites that support this standard, the link can go to> any website, like Technorati, Wikipedia or Mefeedia, as long as the > last part of the link is the same as the tag.>> We also used our Powers (tm) to run the script back in time, to the> beginning of 2006, so if you were already using tags in your> blogposts, all your videos have been tagged since January 2006. So all > your videoblogging2006 tags are in Mefeedia now, whether you tagged> them in Mefeedia or not:> http://mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/ >> Let me know if you have any questions.>> Cheers,> Peter Yahoo! Groups Links> > --> http://www.DavidMeade.com> feed: http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed>> > 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.>> >Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/<*> 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/-- http://www.DavidMeade.comfeed: http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed 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.
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
No, we don't support the element yet. Two reasons: 1) I think it's philosophically the wrong approach, and 2) It's another day of coding and I don't have time right now, gotta finish some consulting work :) Not to say we won't, if I find some time I might implement that. Cheers! Peter On 4/18/06, David Meade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thats awesome. Will it also tag posts with the item's elements > in the feed? I typically rely on these for technorati tagging. > > > On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi all, > From today, Mefeedia supports the rel=tag standard. > > This means that you can put tags in your blogpost, and your video will > be tagged automatically at Mefeedia. No more having to come to > Mefeedia just to tag all your videos. > > To add tags, just add something like the following to your blogpost: > > href="http://mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/ > ">videobloggingweek2006 > > As with the other sites that support this standard, the link can go to > any website, like Technorati, Wikipedia or Mefeedia, as long as the > last part of the link is the same as the tag. > > We also used our Powers (tm) to run the script back in time, to the > beginning of 2006, so if you were already using tags in your > blogposts, all your videos have been tagged since January 2006. So all > your videoblogging2006 tags are in Mefeedia now, whether you tagged > them in Mefeedia or not: > http://mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/ > > Let me know if you have any questions. > > Cheers, > Peter > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > -- > http://www.DavidMeade.com > feed: http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed > > > 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. > > > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> 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: [videoblogging] Reltag support
Thats awesome. Will it also tag posts with the item's elements in the feed? I typically rely on these for technorati tagging.On 4/18/06, Peter Van Dijck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi all,From today, Mefeedia supports the rel=tag standard.This means that you can put tags in your blogpost, and your video willbe tagged automatically at Mefeedia. No more having to come toMefeedia just to tag all your videos. To add tags, just add something like the following to your blogpost:http://mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/ ">videobloggingweek2006As with the other sites that support this standard, the link can go toany website, like Technorati, Wikipedia or Mefeedia, as long as thelast part of the link is the same as the tag. We also used our Powers (tm) to run the script back in time, to thebeginning of 2006, so if you were already using tags in yourblogposts, all your videos have been tagged since January 2006. So allyour videoblogging2006 tags are in Mefeedia now, whether you tagged them in Mefeedia or not:http://mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/Let me know if you have any questions.Cheers,Peter Yahoo! Groups Links<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/<*> 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/-- http://www.DavidMeade.comfeed: http://www.DavidMeade.com/feed 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.
Re: [videoblogging] Reltag support
Would you guys like me to run it even farther back in time until 2004 so all your tags get caught? I only ran it back to December 2005.. Where a lot of you using tags in your posts? Peter On 4/18/06, Andreas Haugstrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:46:17 +0200, Peter Van Dijck > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Let me know if you have any questions. > > No questions, only praise. Great addition to mefeedia, Peter! > > -- > Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen > http://www.solitude.dk/ > > Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> 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: [videoblogging] Reltag support
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:46:17 +0200, Peter Van Dijck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Let me know if you have any questions. No questions, only praise. Great addition to mefeedia, Peter! -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen http://www.solitude.dk/ > Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> 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/
[videoblogging] Reltag support
Hi all, >From today, Mefeedia supports the rel=tag standard. This means that you can put tags in your blogpost, and your video will be tagged automatically at Mefeedia. No more having to come to Mefeedia just to tag all your videos. To add tags, just add something like the following to your blogpost: http://mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/";>videobloggingweek2006 As with the other sites that support this standard, the link can go to any website, like Technorati, Wikipedia or Mefeedia, as long as the last part of the link is the same as the tag. We also used our Powers (tm) to run the script back in time, to the beginning of 2006, so if you were already using tags in your blogposts, all your videos have been tagged since January 2006. So all your videoblogging2006 tags are in Mefeedia now, whether you tagged them in Mefeedia or not: http://mefeedia.com/tags/videobloggingweek2006/ Let me know if you have any questions. Cheers, Peter Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> 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/
