AdaptiveBlue: Introducing AB Meta - Simple Annotation for Pages About Things
adamposey
· 1 year ago
I support this. The web NEEDS more standards. IF only I had friends who could implement this, I'd force it down their throats.
Alex Iskold
· 1 year ago
Hey Adam,
Lets not force things down people's throats - we are civilized here. Lets evolve the set of standards that works.
adamposey
· 1 year ago
It was metaphorically speaking. :)
Eippit
· 1 year ago
I'm curious - how do you see this as differing from the microformat work?
Eippit
· 1 year ago
Note to self - read the linked articles in future. :-)
Alex Iskold
· 1 year ago
@Eippit lol, yes, it is quite different. The microformats are a) inside the page b) current do not have support for the same concepts as we specified in AB Meta.
Andy Mabbett
· 1 year ago
Please don't invent new formats - Dublin Core (http://dublincore.org/) already exists for this purpose, and is extensible.
Can you please point out what specifically in Dublin Core exist to support basic everyday things? Also, the book.author or wine.winery format is meant to exactly extend things in the right way.
jonknight
· 1 year ago
Alex, I've been waiting for this!
But you guys knew that, huh... Thanks!
ceonyc
· 1 year ago
Can this be done in a feedflare type way? If you give me a piece of javascript to add to all my templates and a nice, easy user interface that feeds it data, I'll do this.
Also, if you guys are already tagging things using smartlinks, can't you automatically add metatags to each of my posts?
Alex Iskold
· 1 year ago
Our technologies already recognize content in many pages using various algorithms. We are planning plugins to make AB Meta easier, but we can't recognize content precisely in an arbitrary page.
Sylvain Carle
· 1 year ago
This is interesting, but the problem I can foresee with meta tags is that it works only when the relation from html page to object is 1 to 1. So I can see how I could add meta tags to a merchant page like http://web2places.com/places/us/california/san-... where there is only one object to describe (a place) but how can I annotate a list?
I think a simple rel tag on a block level element for each object in a list (pointing to the "canonical" representation of this one object, or at least a good proxy) would fix this problem.
PS. and yes, I am pimping some work of mine as examples, but they are on topic ;-)
Alex Iskold
· 1 year ago
Hi there,
While meta tags are indeed 1-1 we have plans to expand this into microformats, and then you will be able to express more than one thing per page.
egh
· 1 year ago
If this is based on eRDF, where are the URIs? Your examples do not look like eRDF to me.
If you have "leveraged" dublin core, why have you renamed dc elements (e.g., dc.creator -> book.author)? If the meaning is the same, where are the docs (owl or otherwise) which demonstrate this equivalence?
How is this "simpler" than eRDF, RDFa, or just dc values in <meta> elements?
As far as I can tell, you have reinvented the wheel, and done, to be blunt, a pretty poor job of it.
Alex Iskold
· 1 year ago
Hi,
We said that either dc.creator or book.author is supported. Frankly, people find book.author much more simple and understandable compare to dc.creator when talking about books. The language matters. We already have specific semantics and instead of re-inventing it with commonly shared obscure terms, we should use concepts that we use in our everyday life. this will make publishers more amicable to publish meta data.
egh
· 1 year ago
> We said that either dc.creator or book.author is supported. Frankly, people find book.author much more simple and understandable compare to dc.creator when talking about books.
Even if this is granted, going down the path of having a separate name, but the same semantic relationship, for differing types will a nightmare. Are you going to next have script.playwright? And movie-script.screenwriter?
Concepts that we use in everyday life sounds good, but I don't think this will work out in the end.
As for eRDF and your relation to the semantic web, you really need to fix those examples and clarify your URIs. Your documents are not valid eRDF.
Beyond that, eRDF seems to be pretty dead. Why not RDFa or GRDDL?
Pete
· 1 year ago
AB meta is a proprietary fork..
Stick with RDFa its the standard.
Alex Iskold
· 1 year ago
This is not a proprietary fork. Simply, this is light-weight format that has a chance to be used by people.
All Comments
Lets not force things down people's throats - we are civilized here. Lets evolve the set of standards that works.
We did leverage Dublin Core, did you have the chance to look at the actual spec? http://www.adaptiveblue.com/abmeta.html#ABMetaSpec
Can you please point out what specifically in Dublin Core exist to support basic everyday things? Also, the book.author or wine.winery format is meant to exactly extend things in the right way.
I've been waiting for this!
But you guys knew that, huh...
Thanks!
Also, if you guys are already tagging things using smartlinks, can't you automatically add metatags to each of my posts?
I think a simple rel tag on a block level element for each object in a list (pointing to the "canonical" representation of this one object, or at least a good proxy) would fix this problem.
I won't paste code here because I figure it would be garbled but on a page like http://web2places.com/merchants/search?q=web2ex... each search result could have a Rel-ABmeta tag linking to the page describing the object, a bit like Rel-Tag (see http://microformats.org/wiki/rel-tag).
PS. and yes, I am pimping some work of mine as examples, but they are on topic ;-)
While meta tags are indeed 1-1 we have plans to expand this into microformats, and then you will be able to express more than one thing per page.
If you have "leveraged" dublin core, why have you renamed dc elements (e.g., dc.creator -> book.author)? If the meaning is the same, where are the docs (owl or otherwise) which demonstrate this equivalence?
How is this "simpler" than eRDF, RDFa, or just dc values in <meta> elements?
As far as I can tell, you have reinvented the wheel, and done, to be blunt, a pretty poor job of it.
We said that either dc.creator or book.author is supported. Frankly, people find book.author much more simple and understandable compare to dc.creator when talking about books. The language matters. We already have specific semantics and instead of re-inventing it with commonly shared obscure terms, we should use concepts that we use in our everyday life. this will make publishers more amicable to publish meta data.
Even if this is granted, going down the path of having a separate name, but the same semantic relationship, for differing types will a nightmare. Are you going to next have script.playwright? And movie-script.screenwriter?
Concepts that we use in everyday life sounds good, but I don't think this will work out in the end.
As for eRDF and your relation to the semantic web, you really need to fix those examples and clarify your URIs. Your documents are not valid eRDF.
Beyond that, eRDF seems to be pretty dead. Why not RDFa or GRDDL?
Stick with RDFa its the standard.
a chance to be used by people.