Jon’s Radio Comments

October 24, 2006

Conversational dynamics in the blogosphere

Filed under: Uncategorized — jonsradiocomments @ 3:56 pm

The original item is here.

Advertisements

7 Comments »

  1. Hi John great article, and way deep..

    I thought you might be interested in our design decision for or revamped blog :
    http://www.folknology.com/A_new_comments_strategy.html

    Where as you went the WordPress route (like DW) we chose to go the cocomment route (Haloscan didn’t give us the ownership transfer and resposibility). Cocomment doesn’t yet support this officially but we hacked it (I think cocomment thinking is compatible with the ownership view). Let me know if you or your participants would like the code. I am sure cocomments are ok on this. I am hoping the cocomment guys will actually make it easier by building it in.

    regards
    Al

    Comment by Al — October 24, 2006 @ 5:52 pm | Reply

  2. I would also add that our overiding motivation was comment responsibility rather than ownership, and we saw this as a way to empower participants and allow them to take responsibility themselves. It is also still experimental at this point, it will be interesting to see how it pans out.

    Comment by Al — October 24, 2006 @ 6:23 pm | Reply

  3. sp: … appear in one continuous UI domain …

    SqSquare is something of a graphical 2D version of the previous concept, since an internet aware programming IDE is built-in in every client.
    http://sqsq.jp/SqSquare/7

    Such a system as described in my prior comment could even be a replacement for email I’ve suspected … blogging to an individual.

    Comment by Darius — October 24, 2006 @ 11:11 pm | Reply

  4. Spreadsheet Based Blog

    Here’s my blog post about an idea of mine that might help.

    http://inglang.blogspot.com/2006/10/spreadsheet-based-blog.html

    Would blogging be different/better if we (the blogging community) used something like Google Spreadsheets technology for all our conversations? Each paragraph would be a cell (that can be formatted by the same tools that a Google document would … mini cell-documents). We’d quote/reference by cells rather than site/page/article/comment (as controlled by others). We’d store/host/index our own cells. Gmail would just be a certain ordering of my generated content or polled content of cells. The interface would be something like merging Gmail and Google’s Docs & Spreadsheets, Reader, Calendar, Base, Video, and Page Creator into a single content creation/presentation metaphor, single interface presence, and online communication medium.

    We could group cells into our own conversation, something like our own wiki. Reuse the parts we repeat or reference frequently by reference pointer (like a spreadsheet’s “=A2” formula) rather than copy/paste. Tags would be cell properties (easier to tag implicitly by cell proximity to each other). Copyrights/Commons would be cell properties. “Author” would be a cell property. Cell properties would be replicated as part of the reference pointer as well. Security and encryption would be at the cell level as well. A cell could contain more media that just text such as a video clip, sound recorder/player, or a code snippet as an executable function….

    Comment by Darius — October 26, 2006 @ 4:21 pm | Reply

  5. > Copyrights/Commons would be cell properties.

    Darius, you have just re-imagined Ted Nelson’s still-unrealized dream of Xanadu. Here’s my report on his appearance at the 1999 Open Source Conference:

    http://udell.roninhouse.com/bytecols/1999-09-01.html

    Comment by Jon Udell — October 26, 2006 @ 5:17 pm | Reply

  6. I guess I still want your “Universal Canvas” too… only web hosted.
    [sigh]
    http://207.22.26.166/bytecols/2001-06-06.html
    http://www.byte.com/documents/BYT20010608S0001/
    http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/universal_canva.php

    Comment by Darius — October 26, 2006 @ 7:06 pm | Reply

  7. I guess what I’m saying is that I still want your “Universal Canvas”
    http://207.22.26.166/bytecols/2001-06-06.html

    – Only web hosted and component shared
    – Including sharing/borrowing component properties from trusted peer sources

    Microsoft sells “applications”, but the Universal Canvas would do away with applications so there was no financial incentive for Microsoft to create such an interface. WWW is session and page base so there was no financial incentive for Microsoft to create development tools to support a Universal Canvas.

    Hosted services need “applications” to keep familiar products for new subscribing customers, but providers shouldn’t need to keep to that model.

    I still wonder, are hosted content/service providers even thinking about a shared Universal Canvas for an interface?

    I’m not sure if XAML, WPF, or XBAP will provide such a interface since their application interfaces are still “compiled”.

    Comment by Darius — October 26, 2006 @ 7:59 pm | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: