wp-openid-tagging

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Chris Messina

unread,
Jan 15, 2008, 12:16:11 PM1/15/08
to diso-project
Here's a quick plugin request idea (inspired by Tantek):

http://factoryjoe.pbwiki.com/wp-openid-tagging

Thoughts? Seems like it'd be pretty trivial to implement?

Chris

--
Chris Messina
Citizen-Participant &
Open Source Advocate-at-Large
Work: http://citizenagency.com
Blog: http://factoryjoe.com/blog
Cell: 412.225.1051
IM: factoryjoe
This email is: [ ] bloggable [X] ask first [ ] private

Terrell Russell

unread,
Jan 15, 2008, 12:28:30 PM1/15/08
to diso-p...@googlegroups.com
A basic tenant of tagging is that we know who did the tagging...
(object, tagger, tag)

When there are multiple 'authors' for the tags, this needs to be made
more explicit when reporting them back onscreen.

Terrell


Chris Messina wrote:
> Here's a quick plugin request idea (inspired by Tantek):
>
> http://factoryjoe.pbwiki.com/wp-openid-tagging
>
> Thoughts? Seems like it'd be pretty trivial to implement?
>
> Chris
>


--
Terrell Russell
Co-Founder, claimID.com
PhD Student, Information Science, UNC-CH

Dan Brickley

unread,
Jan 15, 2008, 12:33:18 PM1/15/08
to diso-p...@googlegroups.com, Morten Frederiksen, Benjamin Nowack
On 15/01/2008, Chris Messina <chris....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Here's a quick plugin request idea (inspired by Tantek):
>
> http://factoryjoe.pbwiki.com/wp-openid-tagging
>
> Thoughts? Seems like it'd be pretty trivial to implement?

Yep, would be cool, definitely. I've lost track of relationship
between categories and tags in the Wordpress world. Does wordpress
have an innate notion of tag, as well as category? Or they're
essentially same thing?

My thinking is to perhaps use bengee's new RDF store to harvest the
categories that my friends are using, so they can be re-used rather
than reinvented. I'm not sure if Morten's SKOS output plugin still
works, but we're going to have a chat about this in IRC soon, so will
report back here...

cheers,

Dan

refs http://www.wasab.dk/morten/blog/archives/2004/09/01/skos-output-from-wordpress
http://bnode.org/blog/2008/01/15/rdf-tools-an-rdf-store-for-wordpress

Steve Ivy

unread,
Jan 15, 2008, 12:35:02 PM1/15/08
to diso-p...@googlegroups.com
wordpress tags and categories are now stored as different taxonomies
in a drupal-like taxonomy system; plugin developers can even add their
own taxonomies I believe.

--
Steve Ivy
http://redmonk.net // http://diso-project.org
This email is: [ ] bloggable [x] ask first [ ] private

Chris Messina

unread,
Jan 15, 2008, 3:32:27 PM1/15/08
to diso-p...@googlegroups.com
Flickr doesn't support that, except to the owner of the photo... so...
how do you mean?

--

Stephen Paul Weber

unread,
Jan 15, 2008, 4:48:30 PM1/15/08
to diso-p...@googlegroups.com
They are separate, which I do not understand at all. They should be the same.

The permissions/whitelisting for this can already be handled by my
diso-profile plugin, although I am looking to improve that part of the
code somewhat.

--
- Stephen Paul Weber, Amateur Writer
<http://www.awriterz.org>

MSN/GTalk/Jabber: singp...@gmail.com
ICQ/AIM: 103332966
BLOG: http://singpolyma.net/

Chris Messina

unread,
Jan 15, 2008, 6:17:22 PM1/15/08
to diso-p...@googlegroups.com
I think we should spend some good time working on the permissioning
model of the profile plugin... and we should make it possible to use
this permissioning system as a foundation for most functionality
throughout DiSo. See how Facebook handles this as I'd really like to
borrow from their UI (rather than rely on XFN values):

http://flickr.com/photos/factoryjoe/2163421329/

As for the difference between taxonomy tags and categories in
WordPress, the simple way to think about their differentiation is that
you use free tags on the fly, whereas categories are more like sets or
more-permanent collections. While I can see how programmatically they
should probably be the same thing (like Drupal), I do believe that
both systems derive from the same taxonomy infrastructure:

http://wordpress.com/blog/2007/09/22/tags-and-categories/
http://lorelle.wordpress.com/2006/03/01/tags-are-not-categories-got-it/

As well, I believe the WordPress API differentiates between tags and
categories, so it's something to keep in mind.

Anyway, back to permissions. How can we best structure/document our
approach to permissions? I feel like Drupal has one of the more
flexible (but hard to use systems) so perhaps we can learn from their
architecture while also inheriting some of the decent UI from
Facebook?

Chris

--

Stephen Paul Weber

unread,
Jan 15, 2008, 6:34:46 PM1/15/08
to diso-p...@googlegroups.com
I agree that hard XFN is not the way to go. On the other hand, I'd
like to keep the granularity of 'family, not friends', 'friends not
family', 'friends and family' (kin friend kin,friend)

We just need 'nice names' like the XFN creator has and then put them
in some kind of checkbox-based UI or similar...

That's how I've been thinking anyway :)

Chris Messina

unread,
Jan 15, 2008, 7:45:48 PM1/15/08
to diso-p...@googlegroups.com
+1. That'd be great.

I think we should consider professional connections too, but starting
with friends, family and "web buddies" or contacts would be smart.

Just to mark my concern about XFN clear, mixing XFN semantics with
access functionality is dangerous; for example, when I was at Flock, I
had to set a number of coworkers as "family members" within Flickr to
be able to prevent the world from seeing early screenshots... this was
somewhat odious to me since they were clearly not family members but I
had not other way of marking those images as being available to only a
subset of of my contact list...

I wonder if we should consider the ability to create groups/tagged
groups of people like Facebook sets as a more flexible way of managing
permissions? or does that quickly overcomplicate things?

Chris

Stephen Paul Weber

unread,
Jan 15, 2008, 10:05:55 PM1/15/08
to diso-p...@googlegroups.com
I think that if XFN cannot encapsulate the basic list of categories we
need (ie professional relationships) XFN needs to be added to. I'm
not against more arbitrary tag-like groups in the future as well
though, WP has the functionality for it :)

Steve Ivy

unread,
Jan 15, 2008, 11:01:48 PM1/15/08
to diso-p...@googlegroups.com
Some notes:

Dealing with permissions also means dealing with the ways we can store
information about people. Right now, we have two models: Wordpress
users, and (in a roundabout way) the blogroll. I have the skeleton of
a third - a DiSo-specific contacts table. A DiSo contact could be
linked to a Wordpress user via the userid, and we could probably join
on the blogroll in the same way, but that gets hairy. I'm
sleep-deprived right now, or I'd launch into a discussion of the
semantics behind these various models, but clearly we need something.
We like the XFN data that the blogroll has, we like the way the actual
users can have roles, permissions, and login via openid, and we have
some custom needs (oh yes, we have xmpp contacts too) that in this
case include tags or groups for group-based permissions.

A tangled web we weave, no?

I believe that the taxonomy model in Wordpress can be applied to
anything - the blogroll categories are a taxonomy, so we could reuse
those, or create our own, but I think that applying a taxonomy
(whether groups or tags or both) to whatever object we decide to use
is within the realm of possibility. Update: check out
wp-includes/taxonomy.php for a decent api, which could definitely be
used by a plugin to tag/group/categorize whatever we want. Update #2:
check out http://codex.wordpress.org/Version_2.3:new_taxonomy

Still digging,

--Steve

--

Stephen Paul Weber

unread,
Jan 15, 2008, 11:15:41 PM1/15/08
to diso-p...@googlegroups.com
Maybe it's just me, but I'm a big fan of using what's in place. Users
in WP can be extended to contain any arbitrary data with no extra
table. Links can be both XFN and categorised easily with existing UI
and matched to users by checking URIs (which should be abstracted into
wp-openid and not done in diso-profile). If a harder link is needed
(I'm not convinced it is) we can store an array of link IDs to
associate with in the user profile. Arbitrary categories on links are
supported in the existing UI and just need to be supported in the
plugins.

The biggest reason to me to use in place code and data structure is
that users / plugin devs are familiar with the UI / data model
already. It also reduces our overhead.

+1 on using the new tax features to extend XFN, -1 on using it on a
brand new data model

Chris Messina

unread,
Jan 16, 2008, 1:45:17 AM1/16/08
to diso-p...@googlegroups.com
I'm starting to document some of this stuff here:

http://diso-project.org/wiki/permissions

I agree with Stephen's idea to move a lot of our data into userMeta
(which is what Matt Mullenweg recommended). I won't make the final say
on this point, but I think this approach makes sense and is "doing the
appropriate WordPress thing".

Stephen, do you have a clear privacy model in your head that you could
share? Or do we need to do some research and brainstorming? And, what
can we learn from Drupal, if anything?

I'm still skeptical about using XFN for permissions, just because
people might call someone a friend but might not want to share
everything with that "friend" that they share with all their other
"friends". Perhaps we can have macro levels and then allow for
individual person overrides?

Maybe Will Norris can give us some insight here?

Chris

Stephen Paul Weber

unread,
Jan 16, 2008, 7:55:50 AM1/16/08
to diso-p...@googlegroups.com
Like I said, if XFN won't work as is then XFN should be fixed, not
worked around. Think first of the gains over the facebook model --
there it's just contact, limited contact, not a contact. If someone
sets a person on their contact list as a friend and then says 'share
with friends' I think most users expect that to work.

That said, +1 to ALSO allowing arbitrary groups like 'close friends'
to share things with a smaller subset.

Not quite sure what you mean by privacy model. In code this is what I envision:

Interests:
Wordpress, PHP, God

<?php if( is_('friend') ) : ?>
, My puppy!
<?php endif; ?>

<?php if( is_('contact') ) : ?>
, RSS, Social Media
<?php endif; ?>

<?php if( is_(array('kin', 'Close Friend')) ) : ?>
, My extra secret interest
<?php endif; ?>

Tao Takashi

unread,
Jan 16, 2008, 8:01:07 AM1/16/08
to diso-p...@googlegroups.com
Hi!

On Jan 16, 2008 7:45 AM, Chris Messina <chris....@gmail.com> wrote:

I'm starting to document some of this stuff here:

http://diso-project.org/wiki/permissions

I also was thinking about permissions recently and blogged about some use cases:

http://mrtopf.de/blog/web20/use-cases-for-portable-social-networks/

That being said, are there actually use cases for DiSo? It might make it easier to grasp what you are actually trying to solve in which way.

As for me, I am also using WordPress but am more active in the Python and esp. Plone world (http://plone.org) which also has a quite sophisticated permission system based on users, groups, roles and permissions. But I think in this case I am not sure it needs to be that sophisticated anyway, as we mostly deal with an access permission to certain parts of your data.

What I would like though is a way to define groups on my own. Family and friends might make sense but I might also have things like "Second Life contacts", "business partners", "german friends", "international friends" and so on.

The question here is of course what is discussed on a protocol level and what on a implementation level? I guess DiSo is more about Wordpress specific implemenation details. Nevertheless it might be great to make it also interoperable with other system (like I would be very interested in putting a social networking layer into Plone) and thus it might be good to define what the protocol should look like.

Beside this great to see again some action here, it looks like a great project (I also blogged about it in german) and who knows if such a smaller approach might not be more successful than a bigger one like DP.

Just my $0.02 :-)

-- Christian



--
taota...@gmail.com
Blog: http://mrtopf.de
Planet: http://worldofsl.com

RL: Christian Scholz, mrt...@gmail.com
http://mrtopf.de

Company: http://comlounge.net
Tech Video Blog: http://comlounge.tv
IRC: MrTopf/Tao_T

Stephen Paul Weber

unread,
Jan 16, 2008, 9:30:46 AM1/16/08
to diso-p...@googlegroups.com
> What I would like though is a way to define groups on my own. Family and
> friends might make sense but I might also have things like "Second Life
> contacts", "business partners", "german friends", "international friends"
> and so on.

Wordpress has a UI for this on links.

> The question here is of course what is discussed on a protocol level and
> what on a implementation level?

I'm a fan of the implement first, discuss, reimplement technique --
mostly because I speak better about code samples and demos than
abstract protocol concepts.

That said, we might want to think about how the categories that are
not XFN are presented so that they can 'come with' to other services
as XFN so easily does?

> I guess DiSo is more about Wordpress
> specific implemenation details.

For now. If someone write code for another system we won't be offended ;)

> Nevertheless it might be great to make it
> also interoperable with other system (like I would be very interested in
> putting a social networking layer into Plone) and thus it might be good to
> define what the protocol should look like.

That's the eventual goal.

Terrell Russell

unread,
Jan 16, 2008, 12:02:04 PM1/16/08
to diso-p...@googlegroups.com
If the tagging for a post is being provided/edited by multiple people,
this should be made clear to the reader. That is all.

Even if it's as simple as giving a blanket statement that 'tags provided
by author and trusted friends'.

The authorship of the tags themselves should be preserved and presented.

Flickr munges/compresses this information at the moment and I'd argue
it's a loss of data.

Of course, this should be balanced by the fact that you'd be
announcing/leaking who your trusted friend-editors are with this
approach as well.

Terrell

Terrell Russell

unread,
Jan 16, 2008, 12:08:01 PM1/16/08
to diso-p...@googlegroups.com
Gotta have:

- self-defined groups of people
- group management at the 'person' view
- group management at the 'group' view

These are just containers of contacts/people. When we 'do' an action
based on these groups, it's just taking an action on a dereferenced list
of people - so it doesn't really matter what the groups are
called/named. The group names only have to matter to the user who's
managing them.

And of course, the group-person relationship is many-to-many.

Terrell

Stephen Paul Weber

unread,
Jan 25, 2008, 8:01:38 PM1/25/08
to diso-p...@googlegroups.com
I have pushed a new version of diso-profile to SVN -- better
permissions UI and full support for like categories as well as XFN :)
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages