Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon.
Switch to the new Google Groups.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
Activity Streams
Home
+ new post
About this group
Join this group
Message from discussion Zawinsky principle of social software, "... is single", "... is in a relationship", which (new?) verb?
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Tantek Çelik  
View profile  
 More options Jul 23 2010, 11:17 pm
From: Tantek Çelik <tan...@cs.stanford.edu>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 20:17:56 -0700
Local: Fri, Jul 23 2010 11:17 pm
Subject: Re: Zawinsky principle of social software, "... is single", "... is in a relationship", which (new?) verb?
Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
Hi Christian,

On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 1:28 PM, Christian Crumlish <x...@pobox.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Tantek Çelik <tan...@cs.stanford.edu>
> wrote:

>> Let's solve the simple cases simply. Nothing more, nothing less.

> I'll buy that (and the proposed "pave the cowpaths" approach).

Ok, let's do this.

https://wiki.activitystrea.ms/heart

> re:

>> These kinds of questions were brought up with the launch of XFN seven

>> years ago, but they were all theoretical.  XFN is broadly implemented

>> web-wide today.

>> http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard-xfn-supporting-friends-lists

> I'm relatively familiar with XFN but wasn't sure how broad (or deep)
> adoption has been. Seems like there are some cute artifacts in XFN (like
> "muse") - don't they go beyond supporting the 80% cases?

They supported the 80% cases at the time (blog rolls and mentions of
people on blogs).

However this demonstrates that even *with*
design-by-empirical-research as a reality check, it is possible to
overdesign a schema etc.

Just another reminder to keep things ridiculously minimal simple and
then iterate.

When in doubt cut it out.

The counter-example is of course rel="me", which we decided to not put
into XFN 1.0, only to find out from folks that they wanted it, put it
in XFN 1.1, and now it's perhaps the most useful XFN value, or second
most used next to rel="contact". Though even there, little harm was
done by excluding it at first, and only adding it later when it was
more obvious that it was needed.

Hi Monica,

On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 1:38 PM, Monica Keller <monica.kel...@gmail.com> wrote:

> @Tantek yes we should model what is in the wild today.  A lot of the
> profile info changes have not been very granular so far

Right, and I think this one is particularly useful/important for
Activity Streams per the Zawinsky social software principle.

I've started a research page on the wiki:

https://wiki.activitystrea.ms/heart

Does anyone have screenshots of "is single" or "is in a relationship"
status posts?

@factoryjoe.com - do you have screenshots of this in your Flickr
compendium somewhere?

Please add more examples to the wiki, of what you've personally *seen*
on Facebook (not just "want"), and *especially* other sites too.

Does anyone know of any other sites that show relationship changes in
any significantly different way like Facebook does?  MySpace?  Windows
Live?  Anybody?

Thanks,

Tantek

--
http://tantek.com/
I made an HTML5 tutorial video/book! http://tantek.com/html5


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2012 Google