Hi,

1) annotations shouldn't go via the GET method
2) if we to reserve characters then the pipe will be the one
3) allow multiple fields be combined automatically in the POST:
annotations=domain|attribute1|value1&
annotations=domain|attribute2|value1

4) encoding will be needed anyway, so why not go with the html-encoded
POST

On May 17, 8:15 pm, "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <zn...@borasky-
research.net> wrote:
> On Monday, May 17, 2010 11:54:41 am @epc wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 17, 1:35 pm, Marcel Molina <mar...@twitter.com> wrote:
> > > Hey folks. I'd like to get your advice on the Annotations feature.
>
> > Initial feedback:
> >  - I'd use a shorter variable name
> >  - Instead of using "annotations" once, allow repeated instances, each
> > instance being a new annotation.
>
> > | We want to allow you to use any arbitrary set of bytes for the
>
> > type,
>
> > | attribute names and attribute values of an annotation.
>
> > I think you need to rethink this a little, at least declare a set of
> > reserved characters.
>
> > If you reserved ":" for example, you could reduce this down to:
>
> > annotations=type:attribute:value
> > (and yes, that'd mean that "value" could potentially be double-URL
> > encoded/decoded if it has a ":" in it).  So your example would be:
> > twurl /1/statuses/update.xml -d "status=Tweet with annotations!
> > &annotations=movie:title:Terminator
> > 2&annotations=movie:url=http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103064/";
>
> > I can't find anything to back up this but I believe that POST data is
> > ordered.  If so you could alternately do:
> > annotation=type:attribute
> > annotation_val = value
>
> > twurl /1/statuses/update.xml \
> >     -d "status=Tweet with annotations!
> > &annotations=movie:title&annotations_value=Terminator
> > 2&annotations=movie:url&annotations_val=http://www.imdb.com/title/
> > tt0103064/"
>
> > …which would avoid the need to double URL escape the annotation value.
>
> > Can types use UTF8? Attributes? Values?
>
> > Could I post "annotations=映画:言語:英語" (or annotations==映画:言語=英語 in your
> > original notation)?
> > (I'm hoping that reads "annotations=movie:language:english" in
> > Japanese. Apologies if it does not.)
> > --
> > -ed costello
>
> What are the constraints? We're just talking about serializing / marshalling
> objects here, right? Documents? Trees? Or are we talking about an API for
> creating / modifying objects / documents / trees?
>
> As long as you're constrained to (UTF8) characters, I don't see any reason not
> to use JSON for objects. Now if *binary* is allowed, well ... seems like the
> only issue is little-endian vs. big-endian. ;-)
>
> --
> M. Edward (Ed) Boraskyhttp://borasky-research.net/m-edward-ed-borasky/@znmeb
>
> "A mathematician is a device for turning coffee into theorems." ~ Paul Erdős

Reply via email to