----- "Jud" <jvale...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Apr 14, 5:05 pm, James Teters <jtet...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Any ideas on size limitations or restrictions for this meta data?
> good question; I have the same one.
> 
> simple math based on average tweet status byte size (of status
> structure coming through the streaming or REST interface) tells us
> that it wouldn't take much being jammed into the annotation's field
> to
> double that size. what status size increase is Twitter's
> infrastructure ready/willing to tolerate?
> 
> it seems to me that a few things are NOT candidates for the
> annotations field(s):
> - void * (for you old schoolers on the list)
> - media who's original native format is binary (e.g. photos/videos)
> 
> annotations will need limitations like:
> - overall size
> - if key/value pairs become the model... they'll need individual size
> limitations (for name and value)
> - max number of pairs
> - etc.
> 
> the whole thing feels driven by the answer to the original "size"
> question.
> 
> another question would be whether or not the tweet originator can
> remove annotations that others put on their tweet? I'd assume that
> I'd
> have control over my original tweet in that manner (e.g. "notes"
> functionality on Flickr)
> 
> 
> -- 
> To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.

In addition to size constraints, I'd like to *strongly* suggest that wherever 
possible, annotations use *existing* open standards! Please, let's not 
"reinvent the semantic web", even if we can. ;-)

Reply via email to