Comments on: tag-only blogware etc. etc.

By: sig

sig — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 15:20:53 +0000

Jim,
you’re on the track
The more I know about a “tag” the better — just like in history analysis — who wrote (tagged) it, when, what’s the background and in particular, what’s the relationship with the object/subject, any notes made when written (tagged)?
That would indeed increase the value of every tag and thus the “namespace” being the tagcloud for the object/subject…
Next version will have a “first try” at it of course

By: think again - Ideascape is advanture

think again - Ideascape is advanture — Fri, 22 Jul 2005 01:52:44 +0000

Viva la tagging

Hey, I’m an “aboutness” tagger, you?
Great coversations about tagging:
The tagging culture war by Dave Weinberger gets jump started with a thread from Tom Coates — “Two cultures of fauxonomies collide..”,

By: Jim Wilde

Jim Wilde — Thu, 21 Jul 2005 21:04:20 +0000

sig,
now that “Kind of “source analysis” in History” sounds interesting — muti-faceted tags? But isn’t the “source analysis” inherit in the object with time stamp and author? Tell me more…
MarkN, I think you’re spot on about google catching up. The richness of tags is in the “tagging raw data, non-written content and other unstructured information as a way of facilitating its availability for consumption within an organization or between organizations.”
Jim

By: MarkN

MarkN — Thu, 21 Jul 2005 07:26:11 +0000

One way to look at tagging is that it is simply the best that the likes of technorati and bloglines could come up with to facilitate content indexing and search within their space in a timely manner.
However, relative to the richness and robustness of Google’s natural language processing, algorithmics and automation, manual tagging is an absurdly weak idea. The only rub with respect to Google is the lag between posting and indexing, an issue they are likely well on the way to addressing.
With respect to my inadvertent pissing-contest inducing labelling of the me too’s as “buzzword compliant”…you’ll get over it.
The valuable contibution Sig is making is the idea of tagging raw data, non-written content and other unstructured information as a way of facilitating its availability for consumption within an organization or between organizations.

By: que

que — Thu, 21 Jul 2005 06:33:44 +0000

what the fuck

By: Alan Gutierrez

Alan Gutierrez — Thu, 21 Jul 2005 02:17:46 +0000

Hey, Sig.
Still open to third party developers? My work is finally coming to a close, and I’ll be kicking around for other applications.
What directions are you taking in promoting the concepts here?

By: frosty

frosty — Wed, 20 Jul 2005 23:52:26 +0000

Hmm, source analysis is intriguing.
Something like a button to press for “tag details” — and then you get an area with that kind of thing (who’s tagged something how, who’s actively agreed/disagreed with the tag) — and that’s probably where you’d want to make your adjustments as well.
Depending on how broad the user base is, it might even be nice to “ignore all tags by frosty’s ex-girlfriend.”

By: sig

sig — Wed, 20 Jul 2005 22:51:12 +0000

Hey, I wanna join too!
(must been sleeping or whatever we do in offices…)
And Frosty, think we’ll have something for you in version 3 (notice no humble 0.0.0.3 here) — not exactly what you suggest, but let me hint towards adding value to tags…
Say you’ve been tagged as “couch potato” by an ex-girlfriend — for us others to know that it was her doing that, and more about her would be cool. And add a lot of value to the tags
Kind of “source analysis” in History?

By: frosty

frosty — Wed, 20 Jul 2005 22:29:14 +0000

nice one hugh

By: jim wilde

jim wilde — Wed, 20 Jul 2005 22:25:30 +0000

hey hugh,
lmao you’re so cool. thanks for being the perfect host and keeping the joint open all night.
jim

By: hugh macleod

hugh macleod — Wed, 20 Jul 2005 22:08:46 +0000

Now, Girls…

By: frosty

frosty — Wed, 20 Jul 2005 21:48:17 +0000

Whoa, I’ve been slapped by Mr. Forward Markets! Pot, kettle.
Seriously though, one of the things that’s attracted me to places like GapingVoid and Thingamy is the openness and civility of (most of) the comment threads. Except for the occasional Hugh-hater, the exchange of ideas here is usually very constructive.
Lest I seem too far off-topic here: it’s got me thinking about whether tags should be augmented by some kind of ratings. Or maybe some kind of anti-tags.
Ideally (or not, but it’s my direction) readers can tag things just like authors can. And ideally those tags get into the mix and are useful for everyone (delicious). But what happens when something has a tag (eg “buzzword”) that for you is not only meaningless but potentially conflicting.
Say I actively use “buzzword” as a tag, but MarkN has tagged something “buzzword” that doesn’t fit my sense of that. Maybe I should be able to exclude that tag from the object, and then it doesn’t show up under “buzzword” for me anymore.
So far so simple. But how do I define the value to others of my having negated that tag for that object? Is that a useful factor, and if so how?
(thinking out loud…)

By: MarkN

MarkN — Wed, 20 Jul 2005 21:04:19 +0000

Yeah, frosty, you’re all 100% buzzword compliant.

By: frosty

frosty — Wed, 20 Jul 2005 18:48:38 +0000

Funny, it seems to be in the air. I’m working on something very similar to what Sig just posted.
Oh yeah, and vaguely similar to what Jim has up. Nice.
If this is a conceptual preview of Thingamy, and Jim’s AdvancingInsights is already out there, and my thing is in the planning/prototyping stage, there’s bound to be a bunch of other people working on these kinds of things simultaneously.
There’s obviously something about tags in the Zeitgeist.

By: MAKE: Blog

MAKE: Blog — Wed, 20 Jul 2005 16:37:16 +0000

Tag-only blogware I think there's something interesting here...Tags, not Trees Take my new tree-structure-free gizmo out for a test d...