On 6/12/05, Joshua Schachter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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.
Actually, can't we already use a URL as a tag? There's nothing I can find currently that constrains me from tagging with, say, "source::http://zamiel.livejournal.com"; for example. If folks want to communally start using that format and post-processing on that tag-format, I don't see any reason they shouldn't. As I see it, that kind of embedding isn't the responsibility of the tag embedding engine, but of the presentation engine, which is a seperate beast altogether. > 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. So, just specify its 1024 characters long and cannot contain HTML markup. In this case, its a matter of fiat as much as it is of definition. You could leave the field length just as it is, if you really wanted to, if, as another poster put it below, you were to give some better feedback on how much space there is on entry. But I'm with others in wanting a somewhat larger field. (For full blogging-like tagging, Wetaste (http://www.wetaste.com/taste.php) allows full-form notation and markup ...) (Unrelated, and possibly outside your control, but can we get the ML's default reply-to set to the list and not to the poster. Its most annoying.) -- Alexander Williams ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Proprietor of the Squid's Redoubt (http://chancel.org:8000/Redoubt) _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.del.icio.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
