Hi all. I'm new to the list. I thought I'd chime in with my two cents, here.
I think we're definitely talking about two actions here, marking the content and marking the URI. The tool does indeed mark the URI only, and as a user, I sometimes intend to mark specifically the URI and not the content (in the case of, for example, a blog that I'd like to keep current on). There are other times when I'm marking content specifically, yes, but I think it's important to recognize that users do both. Brendan Landis http://scatterbrain.raygunarmy.com/ On 5/4/05, Marvin Hutchens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 5/4/05, Seth Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > If the data associated with a linked page were static that might be a > > > solution, however little data is truly static - aside from the address, > > > so my inclination would be against that solution. > > > > Well when someone bookmarks a page, imho, they are bookmarking the > > content that they see on the page today, not the content that may be > > there tomorrow. Which intorduces the idea of a cache of what was seen > > at the time of the mark. And perhaps we are talkin about two > > different actions: mark content, and mark URI. > > I think you are right that the user intends to mark content, but the tools > are marking the address. Adding a content marker/cache would be cool, a > sort of state aware tagging system. > > -- > Marvin Hutchens > http://littleredblog.com/ > _______________________________________________ > discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > > _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
