The first is lack of a source input field, which is the place for taggers to put where they got the link. I know we can put it in extended field, but that will not be recognised by the system. For someone doing folksonomy research, where people get one perticular URL is also important. At least for authors, he would like to know where taggers found his link.
How would it be indexed? How would the interface look? How would you display them?
I appreciate that there is some value in explicitly stating that two urls have some relationship, but I don't think "source" is the only relationship that exists.
I also think that, in general, "via" links are more for assigning credit to people than for actual useful research. Also, since it would be hard to populate automatically, most people would not put it in.
I've been thinking of allowing a URL as a tag, but this gets complicated very quickly and I have not yet thought out all the implications.
The other thoughts is about the extended field. It's too small. Can we have a textarea. So that we can input more notes. For someone that subscribed to certain tag feeds, he should like to know why people tag this link without to check each link himself or take for granted just by the title of the link. If we have a textarea not just a text field, it will encourage people to write more when they tag one link.
This is currently a database limitation; I am looking at extending it. It is constrained mainly because the tool is designed to let you cue your memory with some notes, not be a full blog (which is what it will become if we make it larger. People will ask for markup and so on. What does the interface look like? How would it get displayed? How do I prevent griefers? And so on.
Just some food for thoughts. Maybe they have been discussed on this list, but surely not recently. What da ya think?
_______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
