Yeah, obviously there are varying degrees of congruence between terms
and things, but I wonder how to make something like this with a user
interface most will be able to understand? Otherwise there won't be
enough information to actually get used.
Joshua
_____
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of philodygmn
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 12:35 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [ydn-delicious] plural namespaces, link topology
So, have you guys thought about tying usernames to tag instances
so that
there's communities of ppl within tags and you're not pissing in
someone's pool if you decide to start using the term in a little
different sense? You might almost say that surfing the topology
of
links within a tag is the more important activity on the web, be
it
Google's terms or del.icio.us's tags, the point being to not
lock people
into a single namespace the way Google, Yahoo!, del.icio.us and
everyone
is doing now (DNS, anyone...?!). The web itself is barely any
better,
many-to-many links but still locked into single-DNS,
single-namespace
URLs >:-[ Anyway, finding some way of leveraging link topology
and not
locking ppl into a single namespace I think would vastly
increase value
to users. Preferrably in some generalized,
shareable/combinable/exportable open format
<http://web.mac.com/dynamist/iWeb/dynamist/ideas/745CBAE8-57F9-44A9-8328
\
-E4C4C9CC2275.html
<http://web.mac.com/dynamist/iWeb/dynamist/ideas/745CBAE8-57F9-44A9-8328
-E4C4C9CC2275.html> > (where's the W3C, on this, have you guys talked to
them on this score, at all...? There's the symantic web, but I'm
just
talking about an adjunct to hypertext's functionality, symantic
web's a
whole 'nother ball of wax, isn't it...?).
I'd say it's almost like PGP trust networks, as to inferring
topology
from non-flat namespaces...
How about letting people arbitrarily associate tags with entries
so you
could say this one's totally this tag, but this other is sort of
tangential but should still be associated with a post...? And
not just
by order listed, because maybe you want all but one, say, weakly
associated, rather than any second term's being X strength, let
alone
the more you have the less any of them would be (what if they're
all
extremely strong?). I know you want ppl to use tags judiciously
and
most ppl wouldn't, but the ppl who do it right would get
visibility
everyone can use... Kind of, establish their own ecologies
within a
tag, that way, maybe a hierarchical Netflix queue-like interface
for
accessibility and maybe a Web 2.0 drag-and-link node interface
<http://web.mac.com/dynamist/iWeb/dynamist/ideas/A3A2384A-E06D-45C0-A843
\
-BB3E9B7E2881.html
<http://web.mac.com/dynamist/iWeb/dynamist/ideas/A3A2384A-E06D-45C0-A843
-BB3E9B7E2881.html> > a la Shake or DiggSpy for your main interface
<http://web.mac.com/dynamist/iWeb/dynamist/ideas/C276D8F5-29AD-4F34-A288
\
-D8B9F68C1BA3.html
<http://web.mac.com/dynamist/iWeb/dynamist/ideas/C276D8F5-29AD-4F34-A288
-D8B9F68C1BA3.html> > ? I know, easy to say, but have you thought about
it :-)?
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ydn-delicious/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ydn-delicious/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
