I like that annotations will be open so that the various schema can
live/die organically based on client adoption (or lack thereof) rather
than an artificially-emposed constraint.
I outlined some of my ideas for annotations (or "Twitterformats", as I
called them) at the end of last year at http://twitterformats.org —
hope they add to the conversation.
Sent from my iPhone
On 16 Apr 2010, at 19:24, Joseph Cheek <jos...@cheek.com> wrote:
awesome idea! I know I can find a use for it. Some concerns,
Marcel Molina wrote:
Namespaces aren't intended as a way for people to claim their
little slice of the tweet space.
and the sentence
If you want a given key to mean one thing and someone else wants
that same key to mean something else, and someone else still wants
another meaning, consumers of your annotations are put in a tricky
spot trying to figure out how to interpret a given annotation
without the disambiguation of a namespace.
seem to be at odds with each other. If you don't provide a way for
us devs to claim a particular namespace, you force each of us to
figure out what a dev meant with namespace xyz, which is what you
way you want to avoid. Perhaps namespaces can be prefixed with
com.cheek.twitter or somesuch à la Java. Just a thought.
We're erring on the side of thinking that the moderate increase in
payload size for tweets with annotations, even on slow connections,
is both more convenient and faster than the latency and
inconvenience incurred by adding another HTTP round trip.
agreed, especially with rate limiting in place.
* Ok, great. How are we going to figure out what Joe Random's
annotations actually mean?
Interesting. So I could add metadata to the tweet so that my foo
namespace isn't interpreted the same as other's foo namespaces? If
so, then I would want the ability to select this metadata in a
search - if I have to manually code something to recognize namespace
foo for metadata http://www.cheek.com/my_twitter_rules_are_here.html
then I don't want results for everyone else's namespace foo that my
app won't recognize. Make sense?
That's something we need to figure out as a community. But here is
an early idea: People could add some agreed upon "meta-annotation"
that points to something which *describes* the annotation or
annotations that person is using. Think something sort of like XML
DTD, though not necessarily machine readable. This meta annotation
could point to a URL that simply has an HTML document that gives a
description with some examples of the various annotations you're
experimenting with or standardizing on.
so then namespace com.cheek.foo becomes namespace foo with metadata cheek.com/blahblah
. ok, i can do that.