Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [videoblogging] Tagging in ANT

Expand Messages
  • Adam Quirk
    ... Expound on this. I need a learnin to. I know just from a gut feeling that I really shouldn t be tagging any of my stuff with technorati in it. When
    Message 1 of 20 , Mar 31 11:59 PM
      > > Doesn't Technorati do the tagging for you with certain blog engines?
      > > I think I read that Technorati pulls tag data from whatever category
      > > organized you post into.
      >
      > Yeah, they look at your RSS feed as well, and it's a stupid practice.
      >
      Expound on this. I need a learnin' to.

      I know just from a gut feeling that I really shouldn't be tagging any
      of my stuff with "technorati" in it. When I'm 40, Technorati will not
      be in human vocabulary.
    • Michael Sullivan
      I dont understand your thoughts on technorati at all. please ellaborate, if possible. ... -- ~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~ i n t e r d i g i t a t e . c o m
      Message 2 of 20 , Apr 1, 2005
        I dont understand your thoughts on technorati at all. please
        ellaborate, if possible.



        On Apr 1, 2005 2:59 AM, Adam Quirk <bullemhead@...> wrote:
        >
        > > > Doesn't Technorati do the tagging for you with certain blog engines?
        > > > I think I read that Technorati pulls tag data from whatever category
        > > > organized you post into.
        > >
        > > Yeah, they look at your RSS feed as well, and it's a stupid practice.
        > >
        > Expound on this. I need a learnin' to.
        >
        > I know just from a gut feeling that I really shouldn't be tagging any
        > of my stuff with "technorati" in it. When I'm 40, Technorati will not
        > be in human vocabulary.
        >
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >


        --
        ~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~
        i n t e r d i g i t a t e . c o m
        =====================
      • fALk
        Just looked into technocrati tagging. I don´t find it overly bad. I mean you put a couple of in the rss feeds that contain the tagging info and
        Message 3 of 20 , Apr 1, 2005
          Just looked into technocrati tagging. I don´t find it overly bad. I
          mean you put a couple of <subjects> in the rss feeds that contain the
          tagging info and there you go. The plugin for movable type is like 10
          lines long and very easy to use and install. I do not have the time nor
          would I take the time to tag anything after it is published and I would
          never tag more then once. So to make ant have tagging and mfeedia too
          support something that is already out there before developing your own.
          Just display the tags that are in the rss feed. if there are no
          specific tags use the catagory I think its a good way to do it. But
          PLEASE don´t make it all more complicated by adding more "standards"
          that are none and diverting the already problematic tag/rss stuff.

          just my 2cent...

          fALk


          On 01.04.2005, at 10:32 Uhr, Michael Sullivan wrote:

          >
          > I dont understand your thoughts on technorati at all. please
          > ellaborate, if possible.
          >
          >
          >
          > On Apr 1, 2005 2:59 AM, Adam Quirk <bullemhead@...> wrote:
          >>
          >>>> Doesn't Technorati do the tagging for you with certain blog
          >>>> engines?
          >>>> I think I read that Technorati pulls tag data from whatever
          >>>> category
          >>>> organized you post into.
          >>>
          >>> Yeah, they look at your RSS feed as well, and it's a stupid
          >>> practice.
          >>>
          >> Expound on this. I need a learnin' to.
          >>
          >> I know just from a gut feeling that I really shouldn't be tagging any
          >> of my stuff with "technorati" in it. When I'm 40, Technorati will
          >> not
          >> be in human vocabulary.
          >>
          >>
          >> Yahoo! Groups Links
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >
          >
          > --
          > ~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~
          > i n t e r d i g i t a t e . c o m
          > =====================
          >
          >
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >

          ----------------------------------
          life through an artificial eye
          the world in vj vision
          ----------------------------------
          http://vjblog.prototypen.com

          ANTfeed:
          http://vjblog.prototypen.com/feed
          ---------------------------------
        • Andreas Haugstrup
          On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 02:49:06 +0100, Julian Doncaster (Yahoo1) ... No, for any kind of web content. ... I didn t say that. But when you have content meant for
          Message 4 of 20 , Apr 1, 2005
            On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 02:49:06 +0100, Julian Doncaster (Yahoo1)
            <julianduk@...> wrote:

            >> That's the problem. Blogs (and other web-content providers) should never
            >> publish information only in their feeds.
            >
            > Can you provide a rationale for that to be applied universally, and do
            > you just mean text feeds?

            No, for any kind of web content.

            > Is there an implication that there
            > should be a parallel blog for *all* RSS feeds>

            I didn't say that. But when you have content meant for the web (eg. not
            syndication of tv shows via RSS or something) your feed should correspond
            with your web content.

            It's very simple really. Your RSS feed will only be available for a week
            or so until the item gets pushed off. So if the information isn't
            available on a webpage it's gone. It's not cool when your tags expire
            after a week, and even less cool when your enclosures expire after a week.

            When you are blogging you need to think about your webpage first, and your
            feed second, because the webpage is the permanent location. It's that
            document people can link to, it's that page they'll be coming back to.

            - Andreas
            --
            <URL:http://www.solitude.dk/>
            Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.
          • Andreas Haugstrup
            ... No, anyone can read and understand Technorati tags. That s why you should be using them. Even if Technorati goes away a new service could pick up without
            Message 5 of 20 , Apr 1, 2005
              On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 02:59:03 -0500, Adam Quirk <bullemhead@...> wrote:

              >> Yeah, they look at your RSS feed as well, and it's a stupid practice.
              >>
              > Expound on this. I need a learnin' to.
              >
              > I know just from a gut feeling that I really shouldn't be tagging any
              > of my stuff with "technorati" in it. When I'm 40, Technorati will not
              > be in human vocabulary.

              No, anyone can read and understand Technorati tags. That's why you should
              be using them. Even if Technorati goes away a new service could pick up
              without any old tags having been lost.

              --
              <URL:http://www.solitude.dk/>
              Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.
            • Andreas Haugstrup
              On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 11:59:01 -0500, Michael Sullivan ... No, that s overkill. Save the damn info in the damn HTML page. There s no need
              Message 6 of 20 , Apr 1, 2005
                On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 11:59:01 -0500, Michael Sullivan <sulleleven@...>
                wrote:

                > More use of locally stored xml files that get generated by the blog
                > engine...such as for monthly archives or other defined parameters,
                > should be used so that this problem (expiring posts/feed items) is
                > avoided. Whatever happens to your webpage and your dynamic blog
                > content wont effect the loss or inability to retrieve data if you
                > provide linking to these local xml files.

                No, that's overkill. Save the damn info in the damn HTML page. There's no
                need to complicate matters with having two files. The permalink is so
                wonderful because it's the place to link to. If you suddenly have two
                places to link to for the same content the power of the permalink goes
                away.

                - Andreas
                --
                <URL:http://www.solitude.dk/>
                Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.
              • Andreas Haugstrup
                On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 12:20:47 -0500, Michael Sullivan ... Oh, like that. That s how my blog is archived. 12 xml files a year with my
                Message 7 of 20 , Apr 1, 2005
                  On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 12:20:47 -0500, Michael Sullivan <sulleleven@...>
                  wrote:

                  > true. i thought you were referring to cases when the content is for
                  > some reason no longer available, no post, no perma, no feed. Then
                  > having these backup xml files, even with xslt to present them in
                  > style.... is a nice option to have...especially if your blog/site is
                  > second priority to the actual distribution of your content for
                  > aggregators to retrieve.

                  Oh, like that. That's how my blog is archived. 12 xml files a year with my
                  posts. Actually the xml files are xhtml files. :o)

                  Anyway, don't make those public in addition to your public archives. One
                  permalink. :o)

                  > Some people use rss feed generators to create content and do not use a
                  > blog.
                  > They are just concerned with getting content into feed readers.
                  > In these cases, they are creating xml files, not blog posts.

                  Yeah, I wasn't talking about those people. They're not a part of the web,
                  and since I deal with blogs (especially on this list) they're not
                  interesting to me. In those cases you're just using HTTP+RSS as a delivery
                  mechanism - there's no actual web stuff going on.

                  - Andreas
                  --
                  <URL:http://www.solitude.dk/>
                  Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.
                • Michael Sullivan
                  More use of locally stored xml files that get generated by the blog engine...such as for monthly archives or other defined parameters, should be used so that
                  Message 8 of 20 , Apr 1, 2005
                    More use of locally stored xml files that get generated by the blog
                    engine...such as for monthly archives or other defined parameters,
                    should be used so that this problem (expiring posts/feed items) is
                    avoided. Whatever happens to your webpage and your dynamic blog
                    content wont effect the loss or inability to retrieve data if you
                    provide linking to these local xml files.

                    sull


                    On Apr 1, 2005 9:01 AM, Andreas Haugstrup <videoblog@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 02:49:06 +0100, Julian Doncaster (Yahoo1)
                    > <julianduk@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > >> That's the problem. Blogs (and other web-content providers) should never
                    > >> publish information only in their feeds.
                    > >
                    > > Can you provide a rationale for that to be applied universally, and do
                    > > you just mean text feeds?
                    >
                    > No, for any kind of web content.
                    >
                    > > Is there an implication that there
                    > > should be a parallel blog for *all* RSS feeds>
                    >
                    > I didn't say that. But when you have content meant for the web (eg. not
                    > syndication of tv shows via RSS or something) your feed should correspond
                    > with your web content.
                    >
                    > It's very simple really. Your RSS feed will only be available for a week
                    > or so until the item gets pushed off. So if the information isn't
                    > available on a webpage it's gone. It's not cool when your tags expire
                    > after a week, and even less cool when your enclosures expire after a week.
                    >
                    > When you are blogging you need to think about your webpage first, and your
                    > feed second, because the webpage is the permanent location. It's that
                    > document people can link to, it's that page they'll be coming back to.
                    >
                    > - Andreas
                    > --
                    > <URL:http://www.solitude.dk/>
                    > Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.
                    >
                    > Yahoo! Groups Links
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >


                    --
                    ~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~
                    i n t e r d i g i t a t e . c o m
                    =====================
                  • Michael Sullivan
                    true. i thought you were referring to cases when the content is for some reason no longer available, no post, no perma, no feed. Then having these backup xml
                    Message 9 of 20 , Apr 1, 2005
                      true. i thought you were referring to cases when the content is for
                      some reason no longer available, no post, no perma, no feed. Then
                      having these backup xml files, even with xslt to present them in
                      style.... is a nice option to have...especially if your blog/site is
                      second priority to the actual distribution of your content for
                      aggregators to retrieve.

                      I dont think having 12 xml files a year stored lcoally (if generated
                      monthly) is overkill. You could even host them elswhere outside of
                      your blog environment if needed.

                      Some people use rss feed generators to create content and do not use a blog.
                      They are just concerned with getting content into feed readers.
                      In these cases, they are creating xml files, not blog posts.

                      Not really disagreeing with you... just added babble =)

                      sull

                      On Apr 1, 2005 11:02 AM, Andreas Haugstrup <videoblog@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 11:59:01 -0500, Michael Sullivan <sulleleven@...>
                      > wrote:
                      >
                      > > More use of locally stored xml files that get generated by the blog
                      > > engine...such as for monthly archives or other defined parameters,
                      > > should be used so that this problem (expiring posts/feed items) is
                      > > avoided. Whatever happens to your webpage and your dynamic blog
                      > > content wont effect the loss or inability to retrieve data if you
                      > > provide linking to these local xml files.
                      >
                      > No, that's overkill. Save the damn info in the damn HTML page. There's no
                      > need to complicate matters with having two files. The permalink is so
                      > wonderful because it's the place to link to. If you suddenly have two
                      > places to link to for the same content the power of the permalink goes
                      > away.
                      >
                      > - Andreas
                      > --
                      > <URL:http://www.solitude.dk/>
                      > Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.
                      >
                      > Yahoo! Groups Links
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >


                      --
                      ~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~|~
                      i n t e r d i g i t a t e . c o m
                      =====================
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.