As per a couple of conversations in the last hackathon at six apart,
here is our proposal for the 'interested in' field to be included in
the next version.
Here is a little research of the main social networks and their use of
the 'interested in/looking for' field in their user profiles.
(http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pXn69uFFnb93d__8QKu77Pg)
Of course, anyone can keep researching in this huge list of social
networks. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ List_of_social_networking_websites)
A common structure for all of them seems to be the following:
Static Class opensocial.Enum.InterestedIn
<static> object DATING
<static> object FRIENDS
<static> object RELATIONSHIP
<static> object NETWORKING
<static> object ACTIVITY_PARTNERS
<static> object RANDOM (?)
An open question is whether or not to specify a target gender for each
of them as some of the social apps do (see the spreadsheet)
This would translate into this spec change: /** * @static * @class * The enum keys used by the lookingFor field. * <p><b>See also:</b> * <a href="opensocial.Person.Field.html"> * opensocial.Person.Field.LookingFor</a> * </p> * * @name opensocial.Enum.LookingFor */ opensocial.Enum.LookingFor = { /** @member opensocial.Enum.LookingFor */ DATING : 'DATING', /** @member opensocial.Enum.LookingFor */ FRIENDS : 'FRIENDS', /** @member opensocial.Enum.LookingFor */ RELATIONSHIP : 'RELATIONSHIP', /** @member opensocial.Enum.LookingFor */ NETWORKING : 'NETWORKING', /** @member opensocial.Enum.LookingFor */ ACTIVITY_PARTNERS : 'ACTIVITY_PARTNERS', /** @member opensocial.Enum.LookingFor */ RANDOM : 'RANDOM'
};
/** * Person's statement about who or what they are looking for, or what they are * interested in meeting people for. Specified as an Enum with the enum's * key referencing opensocial.Enum.LookingFor. * Not supported by all containers. * * @member opensocial.Person.Field */ LOOKING_FOR : 'lookingFor',
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 6:53 AM, ernest <erne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As per a couple of conversations in the last hackathon at six apart, > here is our proposal for the 'interested in' field to be included in > the next version. > Here is a little research of the main social networks and their use of > the 'interested in/looking for' field in their user profiles. > (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pXn69uFFnb93d__8QKu77Pg) > Of course, anyone can keep researching in this huge list of social > networks. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ > List_of_social_networking_websites) > A common structure for all of them seems to be the following:
> Static Class opensocial.Enum.InterestedIn > <static> object DATING > <static> object FRIENDS > <static> object RELATIONSHIP > <static> object NETWORKING > <static> object ACTIVITY_PARTNERS > <static> object RANDOM (?)
> An open question is whether or not to specify a target gender for each > of them as some of the social apps do (see the spreadsheet)
> /** > * Person's statement about who or what they are looking for, or what they are > * interested in meeting people for. Specified as an Enum with the enum's > * key referencing opensocial.Enum.LookingFor. > * Not supported by all containers. > * > * @member opensocial.Person.Field > */ > LOOKING_FOR : 'lookingFor',
> What does everyone think?
> - Cassie
> On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 6:53 AM, ernest <erne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > As per a couple of conversations in the last hackathon at six apart, > > here is our proposal for the 'interested in' field to be included in > > the next version. > > Here is a little research of the main social networks and their use of > > the 'interested in/looking for' field in their user profiles. > > (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pXn69uFFnb93d__8QKu77Pg) > > Of course, anyone can keep researching in this huge list of social > > networks. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ > > List_of_social_networking_websites) > > A common structure for all of them seems to be the following:
Very true Zhen. Okay, this thread needs more opinions. Does anyone out there care to vote on whether we want a lookingFor field with this enum? Or perhaps an array of enums?
We so far have 1 vote for the field as an enum, and 1 vote for the field as an array of enums. Thanks.
> > /** > > * Person's statement about who or what they are looking for, or what > they are > > * interested in meeting people for. Specified as an Enum with the > enum's > > * key referencing opensocial.Enum.LookingFor. > > * Not supported by all containers. > > * > > * @member opensocial.Person.Field > > */ > > LOOKING_FOR : 'lookingFor',
> > What does everyone think?
> > - Cassie
> > On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 6:53 AM, ernest <erne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > As per a couple of conversations in the last hackathon at six apart, > > > here is our proposal for the 'interested in' field to be included in > > > the next version. > > > Here is a little research of the main social networks and their use of > > > the 'interested in/looking for' field in their user profiles. > > > (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pXn69uFFnb93d__8QKu77Pg) > > > Of course, anyone can keep researching in this huge list of social > > > networks. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ > > > List_of_social_networking_websites) > > > A common structure for all of them seems to be the following:
Assuming that the non-array version wouldn't let us have multiple
'looking for' values for one profile, I vote for the array version.
With regards to the name of the enum, either 'looking for' or
'interested in', I would think about which of the following sentences
makes more sense:
I am a 'male/female' looking for 'male/female/any' INTERESTED IN
'dating/relationship/friendship...'
I am a 'male/female' interested in 'male/female/any' LOOKING FOR
'dating/relationship/friendship...'
Ernest
On Apr 20, 9:34 am, Cassie <d...@google.com> wrote:
> Very true Zhen.
> Okay, this thread needs more opinions. Does anyone out there care to vote on
> whether we want a lookingFor field with this enum? Or perhaps an array of
> enums?
> We so far have 1 vote for the field as an enum, and 1 vote for the field as
> an array of enums.
> Thanks.
> - Cassie
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Zhen Wang <wa...@google.com> wrote:
> > For people with diverse interests, Array<opensocial.Enum.LookingFor>
> > might be a more appropriate type for
> > opensocial.Person.Field.LookingFor.
> > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 4:00 AM, Cassie <d...@google.com> wrote:
> > > /**
> > > * Person's statement about who or what they are looking for, or what
> > they are
> > > * interested in meeting people for. Specified as an Enum with the
> > enum's
> > > * key referencing opensocial.Enum.LookingFor.
> > > * Not supported by all containers.
> > > *
> > > * @member opensocial.Person.Field
> > > */
> > > LOOKING_FOR : 'lookingFor',
> > > What does everyone think?
> > > - Cassie
> > > On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 6:53 AM, ernest <erne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > As per a couple of conversations in the last hackathon at six apart,
> > > > here is our proposal for the 'interested in' field to be included in
> > > > the next version.
> > > > Here is a little research of the main social networks and their use of
> > > > the 'interested in/looking for' field in their user profiles.
> > > > (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pXn69uFFnb93d__8QKu77Pg)
> > > > Of course, anyone can keep researching in this huge list of social
> > > > networks. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ > > > > List_of_social_networking_websites)
> > > > A common structure for all of them seems to be the following:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 12:39 PM, ernest <erne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Assuming that the non-array version wouldn't let us have multiple > 'looking for' values for one profile, I vote for the array version.
> With regards to the name of the enum, either 'looking for' or > 'interested in', I would think about which of the following sentences > makes more sense:
> I am a 'male/female' looking for 'male/female/any' INTERESTED IN > 'dating/relationship/friendship...' > I am a 'male/female' interested in 'male/female/any' LOOKING FOR > 'dating/relationship/friendship...'
> Ernest
> On Apr 20, 9:34 am, Cassie <d...@google.com> wrote: > > Very true Zhen. > > Okay, this thread needs more opinions. Does anyone out there care to vote > on > > whether we want a lookingFor field with this enum? Or perhaps an array of > > enums?
> > We so far have 1 vote for the field as an enum, and 1 vote for the field > as > > an array of enums. > > Thanks.
> > - Cassie
> > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Zhen Wang <wa...@google.com> wrote:
> > > For people with diverse interests, Array<opensocial.Enum.LookingFor> > > > might be a more appropriate type for > > > opensocial.Person.Field.LookingFor.
> > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 4:00 AM, Cassie <d...@google.com> wrote:
> > > > /** > > > > * Person's statement about who or what they are looking for, or > what > > > they are > > > > * interested in meeting people for. Specified as an Enum with the > > > enum's > > > > * key referencing opensocial.Enum.LookingFor. > > > > * Not supported by all containers. > > > > * > > > > * @member opensocial.Person.Field > > > > */ > > > > LOOKING_FOR : 'lookingFor',
> > > > What does everyone think?
> > > > - Cassie
> > > > On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 6:53 AM, ernest <erne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > As per a couple of conversations in the last hackathon at six > apart, > > > > > here is our proposal for the 'interested in' field to be included > in > > > > > the next version. > > > > > Here is a little research of the main social networks and their > use of > > > > > the 'interested in/looking for' field in their user profiles. > > > > > (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pXn69uFFnb93d__8QKu77Pg) > > > > > Of course, anyone can keep researching in this huge list of social > > > > > networks. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ > > > > > List_of_social_networking_websites) > > > > > A common structure for all of them seems to be the following:
> > > > > An open question is whether or not to specify a target gender for > each > > > > > of them as some of the social apps do (see the spreadsheet)
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 8:26 AM, Cassie <d...@google.com> wrote: > The only reason I went with "lookingFor" as opposed to "interestedIn" is > that lookingFor is already defined as a field:
> Okay - this needs 3 more votes? Anybody wanna +1 on this easy one?
> - Cassie
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 12:39 PM, ernest <erne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Assuming that the non-array version wouldn't let us have multiple > > 'looking for' values for one profile, I vote for the array version.
> > With regards to the name of the enum, either 'looking for' or > > 'interested in', I would think about which of the following sentences > > makes more sense:
> > I am a 'male/female' looking for 'male/female/any' INTERESTED IN > > 'dating/relationship/friendship...' > > I am a 'male/female' interested in 'male/female/any' LOOKING FOR > > 'dating/relationship/friendship...'
> > Ernest
> > On Apr 20, 9:34 am, Cassie <d...@google.com> wrote: > > > Very true Zhen. > > > Okay, this thread needs more opinions. Does anyone out there care to > > vote on > > > whether we want a lookingFor field with this enum? Or perhaps an array > > of > > > enums?
> > > We so far have 1 vote for the field as an enum, and 1 vote for the > > field as > > > an array of enums. > > > Thanks.
> > > - Cassie
> > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Zhen Wang <wa...@google.com> wrote:
> > > > For people with diverse interests, Array<opensocial.Enum.LookingFor> > > > > might be a more appropriate type for > > > > opensocial.Person.Field.LookingFor.
> > > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 4:00 AM, Cassie <d...@google.com> wrote:
> > > > > /** > > > > > * Person's statement about who or what they are looking for, or > > what > > > > they are > > > > > * interested in meeting people for. Specified as an Enum with > > the > > > > enum's > > > > > * key referencing opensocial.Enum.LookingFor. > > > > > * Not supported by all containers. > > > > > * > > > > > * @member opensocial.Person.Field > > > > > */ > > > > > LOOKING_FOR : 'lookingFor',
> > > > > What does everyone think?
> > > > > - Cassie
> > > > > On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 6:53 AM, ernest <erne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > As per a couple of conversations in the last hackathon at six > > apart, > > > > > > here is our proposal for the 'interested in' field to be > > included in > > > > > > the next version. > > > > > > Here is a little research of the main social networks and their > > use of > > > > > > the 'interested in/looking for' field in their user profiles. > > > > > > (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pXn69uFFnb93d__8QKu77Pg > > ) > > > > > > Of course, anyone can keep researching in this huge list of > > social > > > > > > networks. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ > > > > > > List_of_social_networking_websites) > > > > > > A common structure for all of them seems to be the following:
> > > > > > An open question is whether or not to specify a target gender > > for each > > > > > > of them as some of the social apps do (see the spreadsheet)
okay, this change is approved unless ernest still has strong objections to the name "lookingFor". ernest - simply reply to this thread if you have additional comments. thanks.
>> Okay - this needs 3 more votes? Anybody wanna +1 on this easy one?
>> - Cassie
>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 12:39 PM, ernest <erne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Assuming that the non-array version wouldn't let us have multiple >>> 'looking for' values for one profile, I vote for the array version.
>>> With regards to the name of the enum, either 'looking for' or >>> 'interested in', I would think about which of the following sentences >>> makes more sense:
>>> I am a 'male/female' looking for 'male/female/any' INTERESTED IN >>> 'dating/relationship/friendship...' >>> I am a 'male/female' interested in 'male/female/any' LOOKING FOR >>> 'dating/relationship/friendship...'
>>> Ernest
>>> On Apr 20, 9:34 am, Cassie <d...@google.com> wrote: >>> > Very true Zhen. >>> > Okay, this thread needs more opinions. Does anyone out there care to >>> vote on >>> > whether we want a lookingFor field with this enum? Or perhaps an array >>> of >>> > enums?
>>> > We so far have 1 vote for the field as an enum, and 1 vote for the >>> field as >>> > an array of enums. >>> > Thanks.
>>> > - Cassie
>>> > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Zhen Wang <wa...@google.com> wrote:
>>> > > For people with diverse interests, Array<opensocial.Enum.LookingFor> >>> > > might be a more appropriate type for >>> > > opensocial.Person.Field.LookingFor.
>>> > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 4:00 AM, Cassie <d...@google.com> wrote:
>>> > > > /** >>> > > > * Person's statement about who or what they are looking for, or >>> what >>> > > they are >>> > > > * interested in meeting people for. Specified as an Enum with >>> the >>> > > enum's >>> > > > * key referencing opensocial.Enum.LookingFor. >>> > > > * Not supported by all containers. >>> > > > * >>> > > > * @member opensocial.Person.Field >>> > > > */ >>> > > > LOOKING_FOR : 'lookingFor',
>>> > > > What does everyone think?
>>> > > > - Cassie
>>> > > > On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 6:53 AM, ernest <erne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > > > > As per a couple of conversations in the last hackathon at six >>> apart, >>> > > > > here is our proposal for the 'interested in' field to be >>> included in >>> > > > > the next version. >>> > > > > Here is a little research of the main social networks and their >>> use of >>> > > > > the 'interested in/looking for' field in their user profiles. >>> > > > > (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pXn69uFFnb93d__8QKu77Pg >>> ) >>> > > > > Of course, anyone can keep researching in this huge list of >>> social >>> > > > > networks. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ >>> > > > > List_of_social_networking_websites) >>> > > > > A common structure for all of them seems to be the following:
>>> > > > > An open question is whether or not to specify a target gender >>> for each >>> > > > > of them as some of the social apps do (see the spreadsheet)
> okay, this change is approved unless ernest still has strong objections to
> the name "lookingFor". ernest - simply reply to this thread if you have
> additional comments.
> thanks.
> - cassie
> On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Kevin Brown <e...@google.com> wrote:
> > +1
> > On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 8:26 AM, Cassie <d...@google.com> wrote:
> >> The only reason I went with "lookingFor" as opposed to "interestedIn" is
> >> that lookingFor is already defined as a field:
> >> Okay - this needs 3 more votes? Anybody wanna +1 on this easy one?
> >> - Cassie
> >> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 12:39 PM, ernest <erne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Assuming that the non-array version wouldn't let us have multiple
> >>> 'looking for' values for one profile, I vote for the array version.
> >>> With regards to the name of the enum, either 'looking for' or
> >>> 'interested in', I would think about which of the following sentences
> >>> makes more sense:
> >>> I am a 'male/female' looking for 'male/female/any' INTERESTED IN
> >>> 'dating/relationship/friendship...'
> >>> I am a 'male/female' interested in 'male/female/any' LOOKING FOR
> >>> 'dating/relationship/friendship...'
> >>> Ernest
> >>> On Apr 20, 9:34 am, Cassie <d...@google.com> wrote:
> >>> > Very true Zhen.
> >>> > Okay, this thread needs more opinions. Does anyone out there care to
> >>> vote on
> >>> > whether we want a lookingFor field with this enum? Or perhaps an array
> >>> of
> >>> > enums?
> >>> > We so far have 1 vote for the field as an enum, and 1 vote for the
> >>> field as
> >>> > an array of enums.
> >>> > Thanks.
> >>> > - Cassie
> >>> > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Zhen Wang <wa...@google.com> wrote:
> >>> > > For people with diverse interests, Array<opensocial.Enum.LookingFor>
> >>> > > might be a more appropriate type for
> >>> > > opensocial.Person.Field.LookingFor.
> >>> > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 4:00 AM, Cassie <d...@google.com> wrote:
> >>> > > > /**
> >>> > > > * Person's statement about who or what they are looking for, or
> >>> what
> >>> > > they are
> >>> > > > * interested in meeting people for. Specified as an Enum with
> >>> the
> >>> > > enum's
> >>> > > > * key referencing opensocial.Enum.LookingFor.
> >>> > > > * Not supported by all containers.
> >>> > > > *
> >>> > > > * @member opensocial.Person.Field
> >>> > > > */
> >>> > > > LOOKING_FOR : 'lookingFor',
> >>> > > > What does everyone think?
> >>> > > > - Cassie
> >>> > > > On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 6:53 AM, ernest <erne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> > > > > As per a couple of conversations in the last hackathon at six
> >>> apart,
> >>> > > > > here is our proposal for the 'interested in' field to be
> >>> included in
> >>> > > > > the next version.
> >>> > > > > Here is a little research of the main social networks and their
> >>> use of
> >>> > > > > the 'interested in/looking for' field in their user profiles.
> >>> > > > > (http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pXn69uFFnb93d__8QKu77Pg > >>> )
> >>> > > > > Of course, anyone can keep researching in this huge list of
> >>> social
> >>> > > > > networks. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ > >>> > > > > List_of_social_networking_websites)
> >>> > > > > A common structure for all of them seems to be the following:
> >>> > > > > An open question is whether or not to specify a target gender
> >>> for each
> >>> > > > > of them as some of the social apps do (see the spreadsheet)
A quick question: Many social networks have Interests text boxes such as music, films, books and so on. Is this covered in here as well? (Reason for the question is that we have been thinking about how to markup a profile from an SN in the DataPortability Project and were wondering what to choose but not much seems to be available in that area).
> > okay, this change is approved unless ernest still has strong objections > to > > the name "lookingFor". ernest - simply reply to this thread if you have > > additional comments. > > thanks.
> > - cassie
> > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Kevin Brown <e...@google.com> wrote: > > > +1
> > > On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 8:26 AM, Cassie <d...@google.com> wrote:
> > >> The only reason I went with "lookingFor" as opposed to "interestedIn" > is > > >> that lookingFor is already defined as a field:
> > >> Okay - this needs 3 more votes? Anybody wanna +1 on this easy one?
> > >> - Cassie
> > >> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 12:39 PM, ernest <erne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> Assuming that the non-array version wouldn't let us have multiple > > >>> 'looking for' values for one profile, I vote for the array version.
> > >>> With regards to the name of the enum, either 'looking for' or > > >>> 'interested in', I would think about which of the following > sentences > > >>> makes more sense:
> > >>> I am a 'male/female' looking for 'male/female/any' INTERESTED IN > > >>> 'dating/relationship/friendship...' > > >>> I am a 'male/female' interested in 'male/female/any' LOOKING FOR > > >>> 'dating/relationship/friendship...'
> > >>> Ernest
> > >>> On Apr 20, 9:34 am, Cassie <d...@google.com> wrote: > > >>> > Very true Zhen. > > >>> > Okay, this thread needs more opinions. Does anyone out there care > to > > >>> vote on > > >>> > whether we want a lookingFor field with this enum? Or perhaps an > array > > >>> of > > >>> > enums?
> > >>> > We so far have 1 vote for the field as an enum, and 1 vote for the > > >>> field as > > >>> > an array of enums. > > >>> > Thanks.
> > >>> > - Cassie
> > >>> > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Zhen Wang <wa...@google.com> > wrote:
> > >>> > > For people with diverse interests, > Array<opensocial.Enum.LookingFor> > > >>> > > might be a more appropriate type for > > >>> > > opensocial.Person.Field.LookingFor.
> > >>> > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 4:00 AM, Cassie <d...@google.com> wrote:
> > >>> > > > /** > > >>> > > > * Person's statement about who or what they are looking > for, or > > >>> what > > >>> > > they are > > >>> > > > * interested in meeting people for. Specified as an Enum > with > > >>> the > > >>> > > enum's > > >>> > > > * key referencing opensocial.Enum.LookingFor. > > >>> > > > * Not supported by all containers. > > >>> > > > * > > >>> > > > * @member opensocial.Person.Field > > >>> > > > */ > > >>> > > > LOOKING_FOR : 'lookingFor',
> > >>> > > > What does everyone think?
> > >>> > > > - Cassie
> > >>> > > > On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 6:53 AM, ernest <erne...@gmail.com> > wrote:
> > >>> > > > > As per a couple of conversations in the last hackathon at > six > > >>> apart, > > >>> > > > > here is our proposal for the 'interested in' field to be > > >>> included in > > >>> > > > > the next version. > > >>> > > > > Here is a little research of the main social networks and > their > > >>> use of > > >>> > > > > the 'interested in/looking for' field in their user > profiles. > > >>> > > > > ( > http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pXn69uFFnb93d__8QKu77Pg > > >>> ) > > >>> > > > > Of course, anyone can keep researching in this huge list of > > >>> social > > >>> > > > > networks. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ > > >>> > > > > List_of_social_networking_websites) > > >>> > > > > A common structure for all of them seems to be the > following:
> > >>> > > > > An open question is whether or not to specify a target > gender > > >>> for each > > >>> > > > > of them as some of the social apps do (see the spreadsheet)
> A quick question: Many social networks have Interests text boxes such as > music, films, books and so on. Is this covered in here as well? > (Reason for the question is that we have been thinking about how to markup > a profile from an SN in the DataPortability Project and were wondering what > to > choose but not much seems to be available in that area).
> cheers,
> Christian
> On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 12:30 AM, ernest <erne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Sounds good to me! >> Thanks for your feedback guys. :)
>> > okay, this change is approved unless ernest still has strong objections >> to >> > the name "lookingFor". ernest - simply reply to this thread if you have >> > additional comments. >> > thanks.
>> > - cassie
>> > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Kevin Brown <e...@google.com> wrote: >> > > +1
>> > > On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 8:26 AM, Cassie <d...@google.com> wrote:
>> > >> The only reason I went with "lookingFor" as opposed to "interestedIn" >> is >> > >> that lookingFor is already defined as a field:
>> > >> Okay - this needs 3 more votes? Anybody wanna +1 on this easy one?
>> > >> - Cassie
>> > >> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 12:39 PM, ernest <erne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >>> Assuming that the non-array version wouldn't let us have multiple >> > >>> 'looking for' values for one profile, I vote for the array version.
>> > >>> With regards to the name of the enum, either 'looking for' or >> > >>> 'interested in', I would think about which of the following >> sentences >> > >>> makes more sense:
>> > >>> I am a 'male/female' looking for 'male/female/any' INTERESTED IN >> > >>> 'dating/relationship/friendship...' >> > >>> I am a 'male/female' interested in 'male/female/any' LOOKING FOR >> > >>> 'dating/relationship/friendship...'
>> > >>> Ernest
>> > >>> On Apr 20, 9:34 am, Cassie <d...@google.com> wrote: >> > >>> > Very true Zhen. >> > >>> > Okay, this thread needs more opinions. Does anyone out there care >> to >> > >>> vote on >> > >>> > whether we want a lookingFor field with this enum? Or perhaps an >> array >> > >>> of >> > >>> > enums?
>> > >>> > We so far have 1 vote for the field as an enum, and 1 vote for the >> > >>> field as >> > >>> > an array of enums. >> > >>> > Thanks.
>> > >>> > - Cassie
>> > >>> > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Zhen Wang <wa...@google.com> >> wrote:
>> > >>> > > For people with diverse interests, >> Array<opensocial.Enum.LookingFor> >> > >>> > > might be a more appropriate type for >> > >>> > > opensocial.Person.Field.LookingFor.
>> > >>> > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 4:00 AM, Cassie <d...@google.com> >> wrote:
>> > >>> > > > /** >> > >>> > > > * Person's statement about who or what they are looking >> for, or >> > >>> what >> > >>> > > they are >> > >>> > > > * interested in meeting people for. Specified as an Enum >> with >> > >>> the >> > >>> > > enum's >> > >>> > > > * key referencing opensocial.Enum.LookingFor. >> > >>> > > > * Not supported by all containers. >> > >>> > > > * >> > >>> > > > * @member opensocial.Person.Field >> > >>> > > > */ >> > >>> > > > LOOKING_FOR : 'lookingFor',
>> > >>> > > > What does everyone think?
>> > >>> > > > - Cassie
>> > >>> > > > On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 6:53 AM, ernest <erne...@gmail.com> >> wrote:
>> > >>> > > > > As per a couple of conversations in the last hackathon at >> six >> > >>> apart, >> > >>> > > > > here is our proposal for the 'interested in' field to be >> > >>> included in >> > >>> > > > > the next version. >> > >>> > > > > Here is a little research of the main social networks and >> their >> > >>> use of >> > >>> > > > > the 'interested in/looking for' field in their user >> profiles. >> > >>> > > > > ( >> http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pXn69uFFnb93d__8QKu77Pg >> > >>> ) >> > >>> > > > > Of course, anyone can keep researching in this huge list of >> > >>> social >> > >>> > > > > networks. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ >> > >>> > > > > List_of_social_networking_websites) >> > >>> > > > > A common structure for all of them seems to be the >> following:
>> > >>> > > > > An open question is whether or not to specify a target >> gender >> > >>> for each >> > >>> > > > > of them as some of the social apps do (see the spreadsheet)
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 8:34 AM, Cassie <d...@google.com> wrote: > Don't worry, we've got you covered with the following fields: > activities, books, cars, interests, movies, music, + much more
|
