On 7/21/05, Phillip Pearson <pp@...> wrote:
> That sounds nice - I like it.

Really?  Awesome!  For some reason I thought people would hate the idea.  :)

Is the '&' character the winning candidate?

-L

>  Something small enough that *everyone*
> can use it.  Not too obtrusive - but obvious when you know what to
> look for.
>
> Cheers,
> Phil :)
>
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 02:59:22PM -1000, Lucas Gonze wrote:
> > Another option is to emulate the "#" that people use for permalinks --
> > a minimal little thing that insiders eyes gravitate to but other
> > people keep away from.  Something like '&' (implying "address")....
> >
> > On 7/21/05, Phillip Pearson <pp@...> wrote:
> > > Umm, yeah, that's a pain about the chiclet.
> > >
> > > The chiclet *must not* have a geeky name.  It also has to be short -
> > > the icon has to be small enough that people will actually use it.
> > > RSS's "XML" icon is good.  "Reblg" was good...
> > >
> > > If we call the chiclet "post this" but then go to redirectthis and use
> > > postthis.org for our own reblogging tool, that's a problem, because
> > > then the chiclet has our own tool's name on it but might lead to other
> > > people's tools.
> > >
> > > If it's only for reblogging, we could use postthis.org as the
> > > redirection site, and then when we get our reblogger up and running -
> > > inside the peopleaggregator - put it on peopleaggregator.org and let
> > > people use it there.
> > >
> > > If it's for more than that - general redirection of a sort we don't
> > > know about yet - then redirectthis.org makes sense and having a 'post
> > > this' button to access redirectthis.org's redirect-to-reblogging-tool
> > > functionality is good, BUT we probably shouldn't put our own tool on
> > > postthis.org.
> > >
> > > (Perhaps postthis.org could redirect to redirectthis.org's
> > > redirect-to-reblogging-tool function)...
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Phil
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 09:04:05PM -0000, lucas_gonze wrote:
> > > > Hey folks,
> > > >
> > > > reblg.com is now redirectthis.com.
> > > >
> > > > I had to touch a lot of little things to do that, so there may well be
> > > > bugs.  Also, there is a new source of confusion -- the chiclet says
> > > > "post this" but the URL says RedirectThis.com -- any ideas on how to
> > > > fix that?  Does it matter?
> > > >
> > > > I haven't yet put in a redirect from the old domain to the new one.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

That sounds nice - I like it.  Something small enough that *everyone*
can use it.  Not too obtrusive - but obvious when you know what to
look for.

Cheers,
Phil :)

On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 02:59:22PM -1000, Lucas Gonze wrote:
> Another option is to emulate the "#" that people use for permalinks --
> a minimal little thing that insiders eyes gravitate to but other
> people keep away from.  Something like '&' (implying "address")....
>
> On 7/21/05, Phillip Pearson <pp@...> wrote:
> > Umm, yeah, that's a pain about the chiclet.
> >
> > The chiclet *must not* have a geeky name.  It also has to be short -
> > the icon has to be small enough that people will actually use it.
> > RSS's "XML" icon is good.  "Reblg" was good...
> >
> > If we call the chiclet "post this" but then go to redirectthis and use
> > postthis.org for our own reblogging tool, that's a problem, because
> > then the chiclet has our own tool's name on it but might lead to other
> > people's tools.
> >
> > If it's only for reblogging, we could use postthis.org as the
> > redirection site, and then when we get our reblogger up and running -
> > inside the peopleaggregator - put it on peopleaggregator.org and let
> > people use it there.
> >
> > If it's for more than that - general redirection of a sort we don't
> > know about yet - then redirectthis.org makes sense and having a 'post
> > this' button to access redirectthis.org's redirect-to-reblogging-tool
> > functionality is good, BUT we probably shouldn't put our own tool on
> > postthis.org.
> >
> > (Perhaps postthis.org could redirect to redirectthis.org's
> > redirect-to-reblogging-tool function)...
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Phil
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 09:04:05PM -0000, lucas_gonze wrote:
> > > Hey folks,
> > >
> > > reblg.com is now redirectthis.com.
> > >
> > > I had to touch a lot of little things to do that, so there may well be
> > > bugs.  Also, there is a new source of confusion -- the chiclet says
> > > "post this" but the URL says RedirectThis.com -- any ideas on how to
> > > fix that?  Does it matter?
> > >
> > > I haven't yet put in a redirect from the old domain to the new one.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Another option is to emulate the "#" that people use for permalinks --
a minimal little thing that insiders eyes gravitate to but other
people keep away from.  Something like '&' (implying "address")....

On 7/21/05, Phillip Pearson <pp@...> wrote:
> Umm, yeah, that's a pain about the chiclet.
>
> The chiclet *must not* have a geeky name.  It also has to be short -
> the icon has to be small enough that people will actually use it.
> RSS's "XML" icon is good.  "Reblg" was good...
>
> If we call the chiclet "post this" but then go to redirectthis and use
> postthis.org for our own reblogging tool, that's a problem, because
> then the chiclet has our own tool's name on it but might lead to other
> people's tools.
>
> If it's only for reblogging, we could use postthis.org as the
> redirection site, and then when we get our reblogger up and running -
> inside the peopleaggregator - put it on peopleaggregator.org and let
> people use it there.
>
> If it's for more than that - general redirection of a sort we don't
> know about yet - then redirectthis.org makes sense and having a 'post
> this' button to access redirectthis.org's redirect-to-reblogging-tool
> functionality is good, BUT we probably shouldn't put our own tool on
> postthis.org.
>
> (Perhaps postthis.org could redirect to redirectthis.org's
> redirect-to-reblogging-tool function)...
>
> Cheers,
> Phil
>
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 09:04:05PM -0000, lucas_gonze wrote:
> > Hey folks,
> >
> > reblg.com is now redirectthis.com.
> >
> > I had to touch a lot of little things to do that, so there may well be
> > bugs.  Also, there is a new source of confusion -- the chiclet says
> > "post this" but the URL says RedirectThis.com -- any ideas on how to
> > fix that?  Does it matter?
> >
> > I haven't yet put in a redirect from the old domain to the new one.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Umm, yeah, that's a pain about the chiclet.

The chiclet *must not* have a geeky name.  It also has to be short -
the icon has to be small enough that people will actually use it.
RSS's "XML" icon is good.  "Reblg" was good...

If we call the chiclet "post this" but then go to redirectthis and use
postthis.org for our own reblogging tool, that's a problem, because
then the chiclet has our own tool's name on it but might lead to other
people's tools.

If it's only for reblogging, we could use postthis.org as the
redirection site, and then when we get our reblogger up and running -
inside the peopleaggregator - put it on peopleaggregator.org and let
people use it there.

If it's for more than that - general redirection of a sort we don't
know about yet - then redirectthis.org makes sense and having a 'post
this' button to access redirectthis.org's redirect-to-reblogging-tool
functionality is good, BUT we probably shouldn't put our own tool on
postthis.org.

(Perhaps postthis.org could redirect to redirectthis.org's
redirect-to-reblogging-tool function)...

Cheers,
Phil

On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 09:04:05PM -0000, lucas_gonze wrote:
> Hey folks,
>
> reblg.com is now redirectthis.com.
>
> I had to touch a lot of little things to do that, so there may well be
> bugs.  Also, there is a new source of confusion -- the chiclet says
> "post this" but the URL says RedirectThis.com -- any ideas on how to
> fix that?  Does it matter?
>
> I haven't yet put in a redirect from the old domain to the new one.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Hey folks,

reblg.com is now redirectthis.com.

I had to touch a lot of little things to do that, so there may well be
bugs.  Also, there is a new source of confusion -- the chiclet says
"post this" but the URL says RedirectThis.com -- any ideas on how to
fix that?  Does it matter?

I haven't yet put in a redirect from the old domain to the new one.

http://reblg.com/greasemonkey will generate a greasemonkey script to
send reblg links to your reblog without stopping off at our site and
without using a MIME helper app.

On 7/8/05, Marc Canter <marc@...> wrote:
> All that ReBlg does - is enable an author to easily switch, specify or
> conceivably send stuff to all three tools.
>
>
>
> Right?

Yup!!!

Hey Greg,

On 7/8/05, Greg Gershman <greggersh@...> wrote:
> I've been sort of following the ReBlg announcements that have come
> out, and I'm very intrigued.  I had at one time designed an
> application that did a reblog of a blog post using the Atom API, but
> never really went anywhere with it.  How does ReBlg fit with existing
> publishing protocols like MetaWeblog or Atom?

Reblg is used to let the user say which reblogging tool they want to
use.  Let's say there are a bunch of different rebloggers and each one
supports a different set of metadata formats and publishing
protocols... by using reblg, a source blog doesn't have to pick which
of those will be supported.

> Is there a way the two
> can work together, or is ReBlg contain components that don't fit with
> these protocols?  For blog posts it might seem like there is some
> overlap...other metadata formats like playlists might be trickier.
>
> I'm interested in how Reblg might be integrated into a search scenario
> from the perspective of personalization and information routing, or
> even saving search history.

From the perspective of a search engine, I imagine that you'd want to
have a link on each result which allows the user to reblog it.  (or
save a modified copy, or bookmark the URL).  Reblg frees you from
having to write a personalization engine and saves the user from
having to re-enter their personalization settings on every site.

make sense?

-L

I've been sort of following the ReBlg announcements that have come
out, and I'm very intrigued.  I had at one time designed an
application that did a reblog of a blog post using the Atom API, but
never really went anywhere with it.  How does ReBlg fit with existing
publishing protocols like MetaWeblog or Atom?  Is there a way the two
can work together, or is ReBlg contain components that don't fit with
these protocols?  For blog posts it might seem like there is some
overlap...other metadata formats like playlists might be trickier.

I'm interested in how Reblg might be integrated into a search scenario
from the perspective of personalization and information routing, or
even saving search history.

Looks cool, guys!

Greg Gershman
Blogdigger.com
http://www.blogdigger.com/

On 7/5/05, Carl A. Wescott <C@...> wrote:
> Cool beans!  Well done.

Amen!  Pretty fabulous.

Planet Web 2.0 also shipped real-world support:
http://www.planetweb20.com/

Hi all,

A heads-up: now if you go to http://coffee.gen.nz/ and log in, then
click on 'preferences' at the top and turn on "show reblg buttons next
to reviews", you will see orange 'reblg' buttons next to cafe reviews
when you browse the site...

Only reviews as yet - but it's on my to-do list to put them next to
photos and stuff as well; basically bring Lucas's demo to life :)

Cheers,
Phil

Hey folks --

I have posted a pretty big batch of changes to reblg.com:

- lots of documentation improvements
- a demo
- source code for a reblg-compatible reblogger
- HTML generator improved and debugged
- buncha small fixes

Have a great weekend dudes.  And to all the non-americans, remember --
we revolted so you wouldn't have to.

-Lucas

--- In reblg@yahoogroups.com, Phillip Pearson <pp@m...> wrote:
> Umm, OK, now I have the postthis.org domain - what do you want to do
> with it?  Lucas, do you want me to point it at your server?  I'm
> running DNS, so if you like I can just give you an A record, or if you
> like to do your own DNS I can point it at your nameservers...

Well, there's an issue with the names that we haven't worked out yet.

There are two back-end sites that matter, the redirector which
chiclets point to and the parser/editor/publisher that a user selects
as their reblogging tool.  I think that postthis is best as the name
of our own parser/editor/publisher (confirmed in conversation with
marc) so that leaves open the name of the redirector.  If this makes
sense and you agreen, your DNS should point to the reblogging tool
that Guarav is building.

Explanation of the above for folks wondering what reblg is:
- The system as a whole is a reblogger.
- It is designed in a decentralized way so that anybody can plug in to
it.
- The redirector mentioned above is the plug-in point.
- The thing that gets plugged in to the redirector is the URL of a
reblogging tool.

I'm in favor of the shortest path as of now - as I'm looking at:
	 - Cyworld expecting Phil's time
	 - Tony Perkins starting to turn up the heat
	 - Avid expecting UIs and all sorts of other stuff
	 - a PubSub gig for Lucas to get involved with
	 - and our company's future is in the code we're discussing right now

So it's all about how to economically get stuff done ASAP - so let's go with
#2!

- marc

-----Original Message-----
From: Phillip Pearson [mailto:phil@...] On Behalf Of Phillip
Pearson
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 4:28 AM
To: Gaurav Bhatnagar
Cc: marc@...; ashishkumar1@...; lucas@...;
topping@...
Subject: Re: requests for ReBlg.org demo

Don't forget that #1 means a lot of work rewriting Mark Pilgrim's
Universal Feed Parser in PHP :-)

I'd strongly recommend #2.  If parsing XML is considered unnecessarily
redundant, we should write a Python function that dumps out structures
that can be read by unserialize() in PHP...

Cheers,
Phil

On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 03:31:00AM -0700, Gaurav Bhatnagar wrote:
> OK so that can be done. What formats are we supporting? I imagine XSPF for

> playlists. So that would mean the blog tool is sent XML instead of HTML.
>
> Architecturally we need to make a decision on where the parsing code will
> eventually reside. Its in Python right now while the blogging tool is in
> PHP. This "universal parser" is going to become the most important piece
of
> code going forward. It will be handling HTML and XML and a variety of
micro
> formats. Right now we are gluing up python to php via XML which is a hack.

> So before adding more code, maybe we should finalize how it will work
going
> forward. I can think of a few options
>
> 1. Write it all in PHP. Handling XML formats is straightforward in PHP.
But
> HTML is a PITA. Advatnage is that we dont need to to the additional gluing

> up and PHP is fairly widely available.
>
> 2. Keep all parsing code in Python. That would be a little bit redundant
> because in any case we need to spew XML for PHP to consume.
>
> 3. We can keep HTML parsing in Python and XML parsing in PHP. This is
> obviously not a clean solution because we wont have one universal parser
in
> this case.
>
>
> Would appreciate feedback on this. I would prefer to go with choice 1 to
> keep things simple. But we already have some code in Python.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -Gaurav
> Tekriti Software
> http://www.tekritisoftware.com
> http://www.newdelhitimes.org
>
>
>
>
> >From: "Marc Canter" <marc@...>
> >To: "'Gaurav Bhatnagar'" <gauravbhatnagar@...>,"'Ashish Kumar'"
> ><ashishkumar1@...>, <lucas@...>,"'Phillip Pearson'"
> ><pp@...>,"'Brian Topping'" <topping@...>
> >Subject: requests for ReBlg.org demo
> >Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 19:31:01 -0700
> >
> >So Lucas is working on finishing up the ReBl;g.org code.
> >
> >
> >
> >But for our demo- I want to ask for one more step:
> >
> >
> >
> >-          when clicking on the review - it sends the review to the tool
-
> >for wrapper and annotation - I;'d like to see a 'title' for the 'kind' of
> >thing getting blogged - so in this case - it's 'Review'
> >
> >-          Now I'd also like the music playlist - to send a list of MP3s
to
> >the tool - but with a different form in the tool - ready for wrapping.
The
> >term "MP3 Playlist" will be the 'kind; of thing that's getting blogged.
> >
> >-          Then if I click on an image - it sends the image to the tool
and
> >the title 'Image' appears
> >
> >-          And so forth - with an event.
> >
> >
> >
> >Ideally some sort of routing 'option' may appear on that routing screen:
> >
> >-          reblogging tool
> >
> >-          Flicker
> >
> >
> >
> >Or
> >
> >-          reblogging tool
> >
> >-          WebJay
> >
> >
> >
> >Or
> >
> >
> >
> >-          reblogging tool
> >
> >-          UpComing
> >
> >
> >
> >Etc.
> >
> >
> >
> >Get it?
> >
> >
> >
> >- marc
> >
>
>

Umm, OK, now I have the postthis.org domain - what do you want to do
with it?  Lucas, do you want me to point it at your server?  I'm
running DNS, so if you like I can just give you an A record, or if you
like to do your own DNS I can point it at your nameservers...

Cheers,
Phil

On Sun, Jun 26, 2005 at 12:27:37PM -0700, Marc Canter wrote:
> Looks like we got
>
>
>
> PostThis.org.
>
>
>
> I like the idea of little 'PostThis' buttons...
>
>
>
>   _____
>
> From: reblg@yahoogroups.com [mailto:reblg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
> gbhatnagar79
> Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2005 11:18 AM
> To: reblg@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [reblg] Re: fresh documentation
>
>
>
> I wasn't getting emails from this group and just got around to reading
> up this document. It looks good to me. However, I think we might not
> need to reiterate more than once that "people don't have to use us as
> the intermediary". It comes across as a little bit defensive IMHO.
>
> --- In reblg@yahoogroups.com, "lucas_gonze" <lucas.gonze@g...> wrote:
> > http://gonze.com/bbm/about.html
> >
> > questions/comments/corrections very welcome.
> >
> > n.b.: we're taking well-deserved heat for bad documentation.  A
> common
> > complaint is the gray-on-white color scheme of the site, which I have
> > now fixed.
>
>
>
>
>
>   _____
>
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
>
> *  Visit your group "reblg <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/reblg> " on
> the web.
>
> *  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  reblg-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:reblg-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
> *  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Terms of Service.
>
>
>
>   _____
>

I wasn't getting emails from this group and just got around to reading
up this document. It looks good to me. However, I think we might not
need to reiterate more than once that "people don't have to use us as
the intermediary". It comes across as a little bit defensive IMHO.

--- In reblg@yahoogroups.com, "lucas_gonze" <lucas.gonze@g...> wrote:
> http://gonze.com/bbm/about.html
>
> questions/comments/corrections very welcome.
>
> n.b.: we're taking well-deserved heat for bad documentation.  A
common
> complaint is the gray-on-white color scheme of the site, which I have
> now fixed.

http://gonze.com/bbm/about.html

questions/comments/corrections very welcome.

n.b.: we're taking well-deserved heat for bad documentation.  A common
complaint is the gray-on-white color scheme of the site, which I have
now fixed.

http://www.openly.com/openurlref/latent.html

--- In reblg@yahoogroups.com, "Marc Canter" <marc@b...> wrote:
> Just back from a hell of a day.
>
> I'm:
> - wasembling list fo vendors who are pledging to put Reblg support in
> - feedback
> - to talk to the Reblog.org guy
>
> :-)

Coolness.

I'm working on new documentation.  There's a lot of confusion about
what we're doing.

Also, I have to brush up reblg.com in a lot of small ways.  The doc
and html generator both need to be updated, and I should create a
small debugger for people implementing handlers.

Just back from a hell of a day.

I'm:
- wasembling list fo vendors who are pledging to put Reblg support in
- feedback
- to talk to the Reblog.org guy

:-)