You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@roller.apache.org by Elias Torres <el...@torrez.us> on 2006/11/24 15:31:21 UTC
Re: spaces in tags (from 3.1 discussion)
I actually use the + for joins. /roller/handle/tags/radio+astronomy
and if you want C++ you need to escape it with the hex equivalent
C%2B2%B or whatever it is. I think we need to stop thinking too much
about typing tag queries in the URL so much, because not everyone
knows how to do that. We'll have more places in the UI where you'll
type a tag and we'll navigate there.
-Elias
On 11/24/06, Dave Levy <Da...@sun.com> wrote:
> Thanks Jeffrey, I didn't know about the "+" = " " thingy - it rather
> negates what I have been saying.
>
> I had sought to reserve the "+" for a join, so that you tag your article
> tags:radio astronomy so that it would be found in a list queried on
> radio, or astronomy or both radio and astronomy, obviously the last list
> would be shorter and a query on radioastronomy would fail.
>
> Jeffrey Blattman wrote:
> > maybe it's because i don't really "get" tagging, but what confuses me
> > is that some tags cannot be represented w/ a single word. for example,
> > i might want to tag something with "radio astronomy". tagging it with
> > "radio" or "astronomy" doesn't capture the intent at all. i would
> > naturally want/try to quote the phrase.
> >
> > p.s., you can use the "+" char to encode a space in a url ... a little
> > nicer than %2 or whatever.
> >
> > Allen Gilliland wrote:
> >> My opinion is that the way it works now is still the best, where tags
> >> have to be a single word and if you want to do phrases then use
> >> underscores or dashes.
> >>
> >> I think the main reason against allowing for tag phrases is
> >> complexity. You are increasing the complexity both on the user input
> >> side as well as on the retrieval side and for what I consider a
> >> marginal benefit. On the UI side of things I think it's confusing to
> >> many users to allow for quoted phrases. Then on the retrieval side
> >> you are also confusing things because how do you get at the url for
> >> "modern art"? /tags/modern%2Bart ... that's not something users can
> >> type in by hand which is part of what's nice about forcing single
> >> word tags.
> >>
> >> As for Elias' suggestion of allowing phrases and converting the
> >> spaces to underscores, I think that's a little dicey. For one, it
> >> still leaves the user confusion aspect around using quoted phrases,
> >> which I believe most users don't really want. On the technical side
> >> I think you may be playing with fire though because why should the
> >> tag "modern art" become modern_art instead of modern-art. And
> >> regardless of which you convert to, is that the value stored in the
> >> db? That would mean that when the user comes back to that entry the
> >> tags list will show modern_art instead of their original tag phrase
> >> which can be confusing for users as well.
> >>
> >> My belief is that the reason why tagging has been successful at
> >> places like del.icio.us and flickr is because the rules are short and
> >> simple. Tags are separated by spaces, period. It's a slight blow in
> >> functionality but keeps the usability as simple and easy as possible.
> >>
> >> -- Allen
> >>
> >>
> >> Anil Gangolli wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Oh. I must have missed the discussion about not supporting spaces
> >>> in tags because I would at least have made an attempt to convince
> >>> people to support spaces in tags.
> >>>
> >>> It comes up for tags like "modern art" that are not really
> >>> meaningful to separate.
> >>>
> >>> Regarding Elias's proposal, I initially felt against it, because I'd
> >>> rather use real spaces in the tags. That's still the case, but less
> >>> so, because I did a quick Technorati sampling, and there already
> >>> seems to be a sizable rift between the true space users and the
> >>> underscore users.
> >>>
> >>> So for example Technorati lists 494 posts using "modern_art"
> >>> compared to 981 using "modern art" and differences in the thousands
> >>> for "george bush" compared to "george_bush", with the latter tag far
> >>> in the lead.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --a.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Elias Torres" <el...@torrez.us>
> >>> To: <ro...@incubator.apache.org>
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 4:09 PM
> >>> Subject: Re: Apache Roller 3.1RC1 (incubating) ready for testing
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Allen Gilliland wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Anil Gangolli wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I installed 3.1RC1 on my dev box. Seemed to be clean using a
> >>>>>> fresh db
> >>>>>> installation and 3.0 required-jars package.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I was trying the tag-related functionality out and I see a few
> >>>>>> issues:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> (1) The tag entry field on the entry edit page uses space
> >>>>>> separation
> >>>>>> and doesn't seem to accomodate tags that include spaces. I tried
> >>>>>> quoting with double-quotes; that didn't seem to work.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yes, that is the expected behavior. We talked about this when we
> >>>>> were
> >>>>> evaluating the tags proposal and decided that most sites seem to be
> >>>>> using the solution that we have, where tags cannot be multi word
> >>>>> phrases.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I now have a requirement at IBM to support spaces with the following
> >>>> caveat. If you enter "elias is cool" it will be stored as
> >>>> elias_is_cool.
> >>>> In other words, we support it as an input (double quotes) but we don't
> >>>> store it that way. Are you guys cool with it?
> >>>>
> >>>> -Elias
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> (2) The user guide link in the JSP footer seems to point off to
> >>>>>> an old
> >>>>>> 2.x guide. I was looking for and couldn't find the documentation in
> >>>>>> the 3.1 guides on the various forms of URLs, specifically I was
> >>>>>> looking to test the tag-based URLs. I know I've seen it somewhere,
> >>>>>> but I can't remember where.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hmm. For the user guide I think it would be nice if these kinds of
> >>>>> links pointed to urls within the app, like /roller-ui/docs/*, for
> >>>>> user
> >>>>> documentation about the current app version.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I may also take this opportunity to throw out an idea I had a little
> >>>>> while ago for documentation that was related to this. It seems to me
> >>>>> that since blogging is supposed to website publishing made easy
> >>>>> then one
> >>>>> of the key components of a really mature blog system would be good
> >>>>> documentation throughout the application. I haven't been a big
> >>>>> documentation contributor in the past, but I think that's more
> >>>>> because I
> >>>>> felt the app needed more work and less docs at the time. Now that
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> app is getting more and more mature it may be time to consider a nice
> >>>>> solution for providing rich documentation.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So what I had been thinking about was a way where we could write
> >>>>> all of
> >>>>> our documentation in small and easily reusable components,
> >>>>> possibly in
> >>>>> xml, which we could easily use to either 1) provide a full help guide
> >>>>> document (aka user guide) or 2) take bits and pieces of the docs
> >>>>> and be
> >>>>> able to insert them directly into the appropriate pages.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So for example, if a user is on the 'Templates' page and is
> >>>>> working on
> >>>>> customizing their blog then we could have some documentation hooks
> >>>>> which
> >>>>> provide contextual help info like ...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1. what is this page for?
> >>>>> 2. what can i do on this page?
> >>>>> 3. how do i use this page?
> >>>>> 4. what do each of the fields on this page mean?
> >>>>> 5. how does this affect my blog?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So for the 'Templates' page the top of the page may provide quick
> >>>>> links
> >>>>> which give a couple paragraphs of text explaining what the page is
> >>>>> for
> >>>>> and what you do on the page. Then you have the large text area where
> >>>>> you can modify your templates which could have a little tool tip icon
> >>>>> next to it which would tell the user what that field is for. Then
> >>>>> possibly at the bottom of the page we include a quick reference
> >>>>> sheet of
> >>>>> the models and macros to help users while they are authoring
> >>>>> templates.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> One of the things that I think Roller has been hurting on is
> >>>>> usability
> >>>>> and in my mind of the most important elements of usability when it
> >>>>> comes
> >>>>> to web tools is contextual documentation. I think doing something
> >>>>> like
> >>>>> this could really help make Roller a more user friendly blogging
> >>>>> system.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> (3) Tags don't seem to be displayed anywhere in the "basic" theme at
> >>>>>> all. Shouldn't we update this to show tags on entries, including an
> >>>>>> actual rel tag ?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think there may not have been any real consensus about whether
> >>>>> or not
> >>>>> to promote tags in the themes since in many cases users may not be
> >>>>> using
> >>>>> tags.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> (4) I couldn't get anything to show up in the "Hot Tags" area of the
> >>>>>> front page. Haven't investigated what is happening yet; this may be
> >>>>>> my own problem.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Dunno about that one.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -- Allen
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --a.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave" <sn...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>> To: <ro...@incubator.apache.org>
> >>>>>> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 5:57 PM
> >>>>>> Subject: Apache Roller 3.1RC1 (incubating) ready for testing
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thank you and yes, I meant 3.1.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> With releasing 3.1, re-releasing 2.3.1 and working on 3.2 I've
> >>>>>>> got a
> >>>>>>> couple
> >>>>>>> too many versions floating around in my head.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> - Dave
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 11/20/06, Jeffrey Blattman <Je...@sun.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> did you mean 3.1 RC1, or are we skipping 3.1?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Dave wrote:
> >>>>>>>> > I've merged all applicable bug fixes from trunk to the
> >>>>>>>> roller_3.1
> >>>>>>>> > branch and prepared a first release candidate for the 3.1
> >>>>>>>> release.
> >>>>>>>> You
> >>>>>>>> > can find the release files and latest 3.1 docs here:
> >>>>>>>> >
> >>>>>>>> > http://people.apache.org/~snoopdave/apache-roller-3.1/
> >>>>>>>> >
> >>>>>>>> > Here's the What's New in Roller 3.1 page:
> >>>>>>>> >
> >>>>>>>> http://rollerweblogger.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=Roller_3.1_WhatsNew
> >>>>>>>> >
> >>>>>>>> > Release candidates are for testing purposes only.
> >>>>>>>> >
> >>>>>>>> > Please help out. The sooner you download, test and report
> >>>>>>>> bugs the
> >>>>>>>> > sooner we'll be able to fix them and get the release out. So
> >>>>>>>> please
> >>>>>>>> > help out the project and take RC1 for a spin.
> >>>>>>>> >
> >>>>>>>> > - Dave
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >
>
> --
>
> Dave
>
> *David Levy *
> *Principal Engineer*
> *Sun Microsystems Ltd.*
> 55, King William St.,
> London EC4R 9ND
> United Kingdom
>
>
> Phone +44 (0) 20 7469 9908/x18308
> Mobile +44 (0) 7710-360922
>
> Blog http://blogs.sun.com/DaveLevy
> Email David.Levy@Sun.COM
>
> Sun Proprietary & Confidential . This e-mail message is for the sole use
> of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and
> privilidged information. Any unauthorised review, use, disclosure or
> distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recepient,
> please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the
> original message.
>
>
Re: spaces in tags (from 3.1 discussion)
Posted by Jeffrey Blattman <Je...@Sun.COM>.
allen,
consider a search box such as google.com. it doesn't need to state that
i can quote words to form a phrase, but i can. allowing quotes phrases
doesn't mean you need to explain this up front. however, suppose a user
did want to do this? what's the first thing they'd try? quotes.
regardless, i don't really think this is so complicated for a user to
understand:
"enter tags separated by spaces. use quotes for multi-word tags".
Allen Gilliland wrote:
> So, consider for example, if you had to explain how to enter tags to
> your parents or some other very non-technical people. I think it's
> far easier to explain #1 and simply say "enter any tags you want,
> separated by spaces. if you have multi word tags then use underscores
> to join the words." rather than trying to instruct them on how to
> group phrases with quotes and then creating a way for them to actually
> mess up the process if they did something like this ... 'tag1 tag2
> "tag phrase' and forgot the end quote.
>
>>>
Re: spaces in tags (from 3.1 discussion)
Posted by Elias Torres <el...@torrez.us>.
I agree with most of the comments here. Just a few more:
Our UI is simply a text box. It all depends on our code to make it
resilient to most typos or errors like unclosed/mixed quotes.
This is definitely a small percentage of the tag used so we need not to
pontificate on the issue too much and in reality that's why I agreed at
least internally to go with #1 and _ since it didn't seem to affect our
current taggging implementation negatively.
-Elias
Allen Gilliland wrote:
> I think we may be discussing this from the wrong angle. I don't think
> that anyone is arguing that there isn't any value in tag phrases and I
> find it hard to believe that under ideal conditions anyone would prefer
> to use radio_astronomy, radio-astronomy, or radioastronomy instead of
> "radio astronomy" when managing tags. So I think we can go ahead and
> agree that it's nice to be able to tag things with phrases.
>
> To me, the real issue is how to do that. So far the 2 schools of
> thought are ...
>
> 1. indicate phrases by replacing spaces in phrases with other
> characters, like hyphens or underscores.
>
> 2. to allow users to group words into phrases using quotes.
>
> In my mind, #1 is the better option because it's the simplest. Does it
> deliberately convolute the language to make the technology easier? yes,
> and that's a shame, but at the end of the day I still think it's the
> best option for users. I don't doubt that anyone on this list could use
> #2 without any problems and would get better use out of it, but we are
> not designing this tool for engineers, we are designing it for the
> simplest users.
>
> So, consider for example, if you had to explain how to enter tags to
> your parents or some other very non-technical people. I think it's far
> easier to explain #1 and simply say "enter any tags you want, separated
> by spaces. if you have multi word tags then use underscores to join the
> words." rather than trying to instruct them on how to group phrases with
> quotes and then creating a way for them to actually mess up the process
> if they did something like this ... 'tag1 tag2 "tag phrase' and forgot
> the end quote.
>
> I think we should also consider the actual occurrence of phrase tags. If
> phrase tags only represent 1/10 of 1% of all tags being entered then why
> are we trying to convolute the interface to support such a small portion
> of the usage scenario? My guess is that phrase tags would not represent
> a large portion of the tags entered by users and so making special rules
> to handle them doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
>
> I also think it also makes sense to consider whether or not using
> radio_astronomy or radio-astronomy has any truly negative side effects
> aside from looking a little odd. If most people can read it fine and
> most search engines will interpret hyphenated words as phrases then
> maybe there is little downside to this approach.
>
> -- Allen
>
>
>
> Jeffrey Blattman wrote:
>> +1
>>
>> Craig L Russell wrote:
>>> Bottom line, I think that there is value in tag "radio astronomy"
>>> which is more than the sum of "radio" and "astronomy".
>>>
>
Re: spaces in tags (from 3.1 discussion)
Posted by Allen Gilliland <al...@sun.com>.
I think we may be discussing this from the wrong angle. I don't think
that anyone is arguing that there isn't any value in tag phrases and I
find it hard to believe that under ideal conditions anyone would prefer
to use radio_astronomy, radio-astronomy, or radioastronomy instead of
"radio astronomy" when managing tags. So I think we can go ahead and
agree that it's nice to be able to tag things with phrases.
To me, the real issue is how to do that. So far the 2 schools of
thought are ...
1. indicate phrases by replacing spaces in phrases with other
characters, like hyphens or underscores.
2. to allow users to group words into phrases using quotes.
In my mind, #1 is the better option because it's the simplest. Does it
deliberately convolute the language to make the technology easier? yes,
and that's a shame, but at the end of the day I still think it's the
best option for users. I don't doubt that anyone on this list could use
#2 without any problems and would get better use out of it, but we are
not designing this tool for engineers, we are designing it for the
simplest users.
So, consider for example, if you had to explain how to enter tags to
your parents or some other very non-technical people. I think it's far
easier to explain #1 and simply say "enter any tags you want, separated
by spaces. if you have multi word tags then use underscores to join the
words." rather than trying to instruct them on how to group phrases with
quotes and then creating a way for them to actually mess up the process
if they did something like this ... 'tag1 tag2 "tag phrase' and forgot
the end quote.
I think we should also consider the actual occurrence of phrase tags.
If phrase tags only represent 1/10 of 1% of all tags being entered then
why are we trying to convolute the interface to support such a small
portion of the usage scenario? My guess is that phrase tags would not
represent a large portion of the tags entered by users and so making
special rules to handle them doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
I also think it also makes sense to consider whether or not using
radio_astronomy or radio-astronomy has any truly negative side effects
aside from looking a little odd. If most people can read it fine and
most search engines will interpret hyphenated words as phrases then
maybe there is little downside to this approach.
-- Allen
Jeffrey Blattman wrote:
> +1
>
> Craig L Russell wrote:
>> Bottom line, I think that there is value in tag "radio astronomy"
>> which is more than the sum of "radio" and "astronomy".
>>
Re: spaces in tags (from 3.1 discussion)
Posted by Elias Torres <el...@torrez.us>.
I think you are right that this is a user question not a dev one.
However, not every user in BSC, dW, jRoller, IBM Blog Central is on the
list and the developers here are trying to represent them.
Dealing with quotes consistently in the UI and queries to the db becomes
a more complicated subject. For example typeahead, urls with quotes
(escaped or unescaped). Technorati has a few tag phrases in their top
100 and they don't use quotes and I have not seen any other UI that
shows them in quotes.
On another note, technorati uses in /tag (notice singular) '+' as space
and I use it as join in /tags (notice the plural). Additionally for them
is equivalent if I type: /religion%20and%20philosophy or
/religion+and+philosophy.
Are you guys fine with my use of '+' which is in line with del.icio.us?
-Elias
Jeffrey Blattman wrote:
> hi elias,
>
> this is really a roller-user, not roller-dev comment as i don't know
> enough to vote because i don't understand the complexities mentioned in
> simply storing it as "radio astronomy".
>
> all things being equal, as a user, i'd like to be able to enter quoted
> tags like "radio astronomy" and i'd like to see the tag as "radio
> astronomy" in the UI.
>
> but like i said, i have to bow out and yield to your insights of what
> this would mean for the implementation.
>
> Elias Torres wrote:
>> +1. That's why we are adding support for "radio astronomy" =>
>> radio_astronomy in our version of Roller so it matches tagging in our
>> other products/applications that already use this approach. If you guys
>> vote on it positively, I'll gladly commit it to Roller SVN for some
>> agreed release, heck maybe even 3.1 :)
>>
>> -Elias
>>
>> Jeffrey Blattman wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Craig L Russell wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bottom line, I think that there is value in tag "radio astronomy"
>>>> which is more than the sum of "radio" and "astronomy".
>>>>
>>>>
>
Re: spaces in tags (from 3.1 discussion)
Posted by Jeffrey Blattman <Je...@Sun.COM>.
hi elias,
this is really a roller-user, not roller-dev comment as i don't know
enough to vote because i don't understand the complexities mentioned in
simply storing it as "radio astronomy".
all things being equal, as a user, i'd like to be able to enter quoted
tags like "radio astronomy" and i'd like to see the tag as "radio
astronomy" in the UI.
but like i said, i have to bow out and yield to your insights of what
this would mean for the implementation.
Elias Torres wrote:
> +1. That's why we are adding support for "radio astronomy" =>
> radio_astronomy in our version of Roller so it matches tagging in our
> other products/applications that already use this approach. If you guys
> vote on it positively, I'll gladly commit it to Roller SVN for some
> agreed release, heck maybe even 3.1 :)
>
> -Elias
>
> Jeffrey Blattman wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> Craig L Russell wrote:
>>
>>> Bottom line, I think that there is value in tag "radio astronomy"
>>> which is more than the sum of "radio" and "astronomy".
>>>
>>>
Re: spaces in tags (from 3.1 discussion)
Posted by Elias Torres <el...@torrez.us>.
+1. That's why we are adding support for "radio astronomy" =>
radio_astronomy in our version of Roller so it matches tagging in our
other products/applications that already use this approach. If you guys
vote on it positively, I'll gladly commit it to Roller SVN for some
agreed release, heck maybe even 3.1 :)
-Elias
Jeffrey Blattman wrote:
> +1
>
> Craig L Russell wrote:
>> Bottom line, I think that there is value in tag "radio astronomy"
>> which is more than the sum of "radio" and "astronomy".
>>
>
Re: spaces in tags (from 3.1 discussion)
Posted by Jeffrey Blattman <Je...@Sun.COM>.
+1
Craig L Russell wrote:
> Bottom line, I think that there is value in tag "radio astronomy"
> which is more than the sum of "radio" and "astronomy".
>
Re: spaces in tags (from 3.1 discussion)
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
For me the issue is specificity of the tag.
If I am interested in radio astronomy, I might have zero interest in
radio and minimal interest in astronomy. My experience with search
engines is that given a query "radio astronomy", search engines are
more likely to return results based on how many occurrences of
"radio" and how many occurrences of "astronomy" there are, and only
minimally consider how many occurrences of "radio astronomy" there
are in a candidate article.
Basically, I have to perform a more specialized query if I want to
exclude occurrences of radio and astronomy in favor of those
candidates that contain "radio astronomy".
Bottom line, I think that there is value in tag "radio astronomy"
which is more than the sum of "radio" and "astronomy".
Craig
On Nov 27, 2006, at 12:09 AM, Dave Levy wrote:
> I don't think I am really considering the URL syntax so much.
>
> Its just that when tagging an article (or bookmark) one should
> consider the queries that will be made. The reason for tagging is
> to find the content again, or participate in a folksonomy that
> tells one something. It seems to me that you have to consider the
> use of the tag as one allocates it. This is why I choose (now)
> between compound nouns and multiple words. So while I can agree to
> ignore the UI, the issue of tag design and meaning does not go away.
>
> I would tag the bookmark as "radio astronomy" and retrieve it using
> radio+astrononomy, while others might find the content using
> astronomy and I add to the frequency and diminish the
> discrimination of both tags.
>
> You can see my tag lists at
>
> http://del.icio.us/DaveLevy and http://blogs.sun.com/DaveLevy/page/
> MoreTagsLinksBeta,
>
> which is a very short version of the tag cloud (and interesting
> includes Food+Drink where I am using + as synonym for "and"/"&"
> because being a UNIX guy for so long I don't trust software to
> interpretate the & as a straightforward character.
>
> My reason for banging on is I think that actually our problem is
> that we don't have an agreement on how to do the join not on how to
> delimit the tags, and this will become more important if we try and
> manage/maintain tag clouds over multiple applications and instances
> e.g. roller & technorati
>
> Elias Torres wrote:
>> I actually use the + for joins. /roller/handle/tags/radio+astronomy
>> and if you want C++ you need to escape it with the hex equivalent
>> C%2B2%B or whatever it is. I think we need to stop thinking too much
>> about typing tag queries in the URL so much, because not everyone
>> knows how to do that. We'll have more places in the UI where you'll
>> type a tag and we'll navigate there.
>>
>> -Elias
>>
>> On 11/24/06, Dave Levy <Da...@sun.com> wrote:
>>> Thanks Jeffrey, I didn't know about the "+" = " " thingy - it rather
>>> negates what I have been saying.
>>>
>>> I had sought to reserve the "+" for a join, so that you tag your
>>> article
>>> tags:radio astronomy so that it would be found in a list queried on
>>> radio, or astronomy or both radio and astronomy, obviously the
>>> last list
>>> would be shorter and a query on radioastronomy would fail.
>>>
>>> Jeffrey Blattman wrote:
>>> > maybe it's because i don't really "get" tagging, but what
>>> confuses me
>>> > is that some tags cannot be represented w/ a single word. for
>>> example,
>>> > i might want to tag something with "radio astronomy". tagging
>>> it with
>>> > "radio" or "astronomy" doesn't capture the intent at all. i would
>>> > naturally want/try to quote the phrase.
>>> >
>>> > p.s., you can use the "+" char to encode a space in a url ... a
>>> little
>>> > nicer than %2 or whatever.
>>> >
>>> > Allen Gilliland wrote:
>>> >> My opinion is that the way it works now is still the best,
>>> where tags
>>> >> have to be a single word and if you want to do phrases then use
>>> >> underscores or dashes.
>>> >>
>>> >> I think the main reason against allowing for tag phrases is
>>> >> complexity. You are increasing the complexity both on the
>>> user input
>>> >> side as well as on the retrieval side and for what I consider a
>>> >> marginal benefit. On the UI side of things I think it's
>>> confusing to
>>> >> many users to allow for quoted phrases. Then on the retrieval
>>> side
>>> >> you are also confusing things because how do you get at the
>>> url for
>>> >> "modern art"? /tags/modern%2Bart ... that's not something
>>> users can
>>> >> type in by hand which is part of what's nice about forcing single
>>> >> word tags.
>>> >>
>>> >> As for Elias' suggestion of allowing phrases and converting the
>>> >> spaces to underscores, I think that's a little dicey. For
>>> one, it
>>> >> still leaves the user confusion aspect around using quoted
>>> phrases,
>>> >> which I believe most users don't really want. On the
>>> technical side
>>> >> I think you may be playing with fire though because why should
>>> the
>>> >> tag "modern art" become modern_art instead of modern-art. And
>>> >> regardless of which you convert to, is that the value stored
>>> in the
>>> >> db? That would mean that when the user comes back to that
>>> entry the
>>> >> tags list will show modern_art instead of their original tag
>>> phrase
>>> >> which can be confusing for users as well.
>>> >>
>>> >> My belief is that the reason why tagging has been successful at
>>> >> places like del.icio.us and flickr is because the rules are
>>> short and
>>> >> simple. Tags are separated by spaces, period. It's a slight
>>> blow in
>>> >> functionality but keeps the usability as simple and easy as
>>> possible.
>>> >>
>>> >> -- Allen
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Anil Gangolli wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Oh. I must have missed the discussion about not supporting
>>> spaces
>>> >>> in tags because I would at least have made an attempt to
>>> convince
>>> >>> people to support spaces in tags.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> It comes up for tags like "modern art" that are not really
>>> >>> meaningful to separate.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Regarding Elias's proposal, I initially felt against it,
>>> because I'd
>>> >>> rather use real spaces in the tags. That's still the case,
>>> but less
>>> >>> so, because I did a quick Technorati sampling, and there already
>>> >>> seems to be a sizable rift between the true space users and the
>>> >>> underscore users.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> So for example Technorati lists 494 posts using "modern_art"
>>> >>> compared to 981 using "modern art" and differences in the
>>> thousands
>>> >>> for "george bush" compared to "george_bush", with the latter
>>> tag far
>>> >>> in the lead.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> --a.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Elias Torres"
>>> <el...@torrez.us>
>>> >>> To: <ro...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> >>> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 4:09 PM
>>> >>> Subject: Re: Apache Roller 3.1RC1 (incubating) ready for testing
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Allen Gilliland wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Anil Gangolli wrote:
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> I installed 3.1RC1 on my dev box. Seemed to be clean using a
>>> >>>>>> fresh db
>>> >>>>>> installation and 3.0 required-jars package.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> I was trying the tag-related functionality out and I see a
>>> few
>>> >>>>>> issues:
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> (1) The tag entry field on the entry edit page uses space
>>> >>>>>> separation
>>> >>>>>> and doesn't seem to accomodate tags that include spaces.
>>> I tried
>>> >>>>>> quoting with double-quotes; that didn't seem to work.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Yes, that is the expected behavior. We talked about this
>>> when we
>>> >>>>> were
>>> >>>>> evaluating the tags proposal and decided that most sites
>>> seem to be
>>> >>>>> using the solution that we have, where tags cannot be multi
>>> word
>>> >>>>> phrases.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> I now have a requirement at IBM to support spaces with the
>>> following
>>> >>>> caveat. If you enter "elias is cool" it will be stored as
>>> >>>> elias_is_cool.
>>> >>>> In other words, we support it as an input (double quotes)
>>> but we don't
>>> >>>> store it that way. Are you guys cool with it?
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> -Elias
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> (2) The user guide link in the JSP footer seems to point
>>> off to
>>> >>>>>> an old
>>> >>>>>> 2.x guide. I was looking for and couldn't find the
>>> documentation in
>>> >>>>>> the 3.1 guides on the various forms of URLs, specifically
>>> I was
>>> >>>>>> looking to test the tag-based URLs. I know I've seen it
>>> somewhere,
>>> >>>>>> but I can't remember where.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Hmm. For the user guide I think it would be nice if these
>>> kinds of
>>> >>>>> links pointed to urls within the app, like /roller-ui/docs/
>>> *, for
>>> >>>>> user
>>> >>>>> documentation about the current app version.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> I may also take this opportunity to throw out an idea I had
>>> a little
>>> >>>>> while ago for documentation that was related to this. It
>>> seems to me
>>> >>>>> that since blogging is supposed to website publishing made
>>> easy
>>> >>>>> then one
>>> >>>>> of the key components of a really mature blog system would
>>> be good
>>> >>>>> documentation throughout the application. I haven't been a
>>> big
>>> >>>>> documentation contributor in the past, but I think that's more
>>> >>>>> because I
>>> >>>>> felt the app needed more work and less docs at the time.
>>> Now that
>>> >>>>> the
>>> >>>>> app is getting more and more mature it may be time to
>>> consider a nice
>>> >>>>> solution for providing rich documentation.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> So what I had been thinking about was a way where we could
>>> write
>>> >>>>> all of
>>> >>>>> our documentation in small and easily reusable components,
>>> >>>>> possibly in
>>> >>>>> xml, which we could easily use to either 1) provide a full
>>> help guide
>>> >>>>> document (aka user guide) or 2) take bits and pieces of the
>>> docs
>>> >>>>> and be
>>> >>>>> able to insert them directly into the appropriate pages.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> So for example, if a user is on the 'Templates' page and is
>>> >>>>> working on
>>> >>>>> customizing their blog then we could have some
>>> documentation hooks
>>> >>>>> which
>>> >>>>> provide contextual help info like ...
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> 1. what is this page for?
>>> >>>>> 2. what can i do on this page?
>>> >>>>> 3. how do i use this page?
>>> >>>>> 4. what do each of the fields on this page mean?
>>> >>>>> 5. how does this affect my blog?
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> So for the 'Templates' page the top of the page may provide
>>> quick
>>> >>>>> links
>>> >>>>> which give a couple paragraphs of text explaining what the
>>> page is
>>> >>>>> for
>>> >>>>> and what you do on the page. Then you have the large text
>>> area where
>>> >>>>> you can modify your templates which could have a little
>>> tool tip icon
>>> >>>>> next to it which would tell the user what that field is
>>> for. Then
>>> >>>>> possibly at the bottom of the page we include a quick
>>> reference
>>> >>>>> sheet of
>>> >>>>> the models and macros to help users while they are authoring
>>> >>>>> templates.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> One of the things that I think Roller has been hurting on is
>>> >>>>> usability
>>> >>>>> and in my mind of the most important elements of usability
>>> when it
>>> >>>>> comes
>>> >>>>> to web tools is contextual documentation. I think doing
>>> something
>>> >>>>> like
>>> >>>>> this could really help make Roller a more user friendly
>>> blogging
>>> >>>>> system.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> (3) Tags don't seem to be displayed anywhere in the
>>> "basic" theme at
>>> >>>>>> all. Shouldn't we update this to show tags on entries,
>>> including an
>>> >>>>>> actual rel tag ?
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> I think there may not have been any real consensus about
>>> whether
>>> >>>>> or not
>>> >>>>> to promote tags in the themes since in many cases users may
>>> not be
>>> >>>>> using
>>> >>>>> tags.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> (4) I couldn't get anything to show up in the "Hot Tags"
>>> area of the
>>> >>>>>> front page. Haven't investigated what is happening yet;
>>> this may be
>>> >>>>>> my own problem.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Dunno about that one.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> -- Allen
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> --a.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave"
>>> <sn...@gmail.com>
>>> >>>>>> To: <ro...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> >>>>>> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 5:57 PM
>>> >>>>>> Subject: Apache Roller 3.1RC1 (incubating) ready for testing
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> Thank you and yes, I meant 3.1.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> With releasing 3.1, re-releasing 2.3.1 and working on 3.2
>>> I've
>>> >>>>>>> got a
>>> >>>>>>> couple
>>> >>>>>>> too many versions floating around in my head.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> - Dave
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> On 11/20/06, Jeffrey Blattman <Je...@sun.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>> did you mean 3.1 RC1, or are we skipping 3.1?
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> Dave wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>> > I've merged all applicable bug fixes from trunk to the
>>> >>>>>>>> roller_3.1
>>> >>>>>>>> > branch and prepared a first release candidate for the 3.1
>>> >>>>>>>> release.
>>> >>>>>>>> You
>>> >>>>>>>> > can find the release files and latest 3.1 docs here:
>>> >>>>>>>> >
>>> >>>>>>>> > http://people.apache.org/~snoopdave/apache-roller-3.1/
>>> >>>>>>>> >
>>> >>>>>>>> > Here's the What's New in Roller 3.1 page:
>>> >>>>>>>> >
>>> >>>>>>>> http://rollerweblogger.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?
>>> page=Roller_3.1_WhatsNew
>>> >>>>>>>> >
>>> >>>>>>>> > Release candidates are for testing purposes only.
>>> >>>>>>>> >
>>> >>>>>>>> > Please help out. The sooner you download, test and report
>>> >>>>>>>> bugs the
>>> >>>>>>>> > sooner we'll be able to fix them and get the release
>>> out. So
>>> >>>>>>>> please
>>> >>>>>>>> > help out the project and take RC1 for a spin.
>>> >>>>>>>> >
>>> >>>>>>>> > - Dave
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>>> *David Levy *
>>> *Principal Engineer*
>>> *Sun Microsystems Ltd.*
>>> 55, King William St.,
>>> London EC4R 9ND
>>> United Kingdom
>>>
>>>
>>> Phone +44 (0) 20 7469 9908/x18308
>>> Mobile +44 (0) 7710-360922
>>>
>>> Blog http://blogs.sun.com/DaveLevy
>>> Email David.Levy@Sun.COM
>>>
>>> Sun Proprietary & Confidential . This e-mail message is for the
>>> sole use
>>> of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and
>>> privilidged information. Any unauthorised review, use, disclosure or
>>> distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recepient,
>>> please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies
>>> of the
>>> original message.
>>>
>>>
>
> --
>
> Dave
>
> *David Levy *
> *Principal Engineer*
> *Sun Microsystems Ltd.*
> 55, King William St.,
> London EC4R 9ND
> United Kingdom
>
>
> Phone +44 (0) 20 7469 9908/x18308
> Mobile +44 (0) 7710-360922
>
> Blog http://blogs.sun.com/DaveLevy
> Email David.Levy@Sun.COM
>
> Sun Proprietary & Confidential . This e-mail message is for the
> sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
> and privilidged information. Any unauthorised review, use,
> disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
> intended recepient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and
> destroy all copies of the original message.
>
Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: spaces in tags (from 3.1 discussion)
Posted by Dave Levy <Da...@Sun.COM>.
I don't think I am really considering the URL syntax so much.
Its just that when tagging an article (or bookmark) one should consider
the queries that will be made. The reason for tagging is to find the
content again, or participate in a folksonomy that tells one something.
It seems to me that you have to consider the use of the tag as one
allocates it. This is why I choose (now) between compound nouns and
multiple words. So while I can agree to ignore the UI, the issue of tag
design and meaning does not go away.
I would tag the bookmark as "radio astronomy" and retrieve it using
radio+astrononomy, while others might find the content using astronomy
and I add to the frequency and diminish the discrimination of both tags.
You can see my tag lists at
http://del.icio.us/DaveLevy and
http://blogs.sun.com/DaveLevy/page/MoreTagsLinksBeta,
which is a very short version of the tag cloud (and interesting includes
Food+Drink where I am using + as synonym for "and"/"&" because being a
UNIX guy for so long I don't trust software to interpretate the & as a
straightforward character.
My reason for banging on is I think that actually our problem is that we
don't have an agreement on how to do the join not on how to delimit the
tags, and this will become more important if we try and manage/maintain
tag clouds over multiple applications and instances e.g. roller & technorati
Elias Torres wrote:
> I actually use the + for joins. /roller/handle/tags/radio+astronomy
> and if you want C++ you need to escape it with the hex equivalent
> C%2B2%B or whatever it is. I think we need to stop thinking too much
> about typing tag queries in the URL so much, because not everyone
> knows how to do that. We'll have more places in the UI where you'll
> type a tag and we'll navigate there.
>
> -Elias
>
> On 11/24/06, Dave Levy <Da...@sun.com> wrote:
>> Thanks Jeffrey, I didn't know about the "+" = " " thingy - it rather
>> negates what I have been saying.
>>
>> I had sought to reserve the "+" for a join, so that you tag your article
>> tags:radio astronomy so that it would be found in a list queried on
>> radio, or astronomy or both radio and astronomy, obviously the last list
>> would be shorter and a query on radioastronomy would fail.
>>
>> Jeffrey Blattman wrote:
>> > maybe it's because i don't really "get" tagging, but what confuses me
>> > is that some tags cannot be represented w/ a single word. for example,
>> > i might want to tag something with "radio astronomy". tagging it with
>> > "radio" or "astronomy" doesn't capture the intent at all. i would
>> > naturally want/try to quote the phrase.
>> >
>> > p.s., you can use the "+" char to encode a space in a url ... a little
>> > nicer than %2 or whatever.
>> >
>> > Allen Gilliland wrote:
>> >> My opinion is that the way it works now is still the best, where tags
>> >> have to be a single word and if you want to do phrases then use
>> >> underscores or dashes.
>> >>
>> >> I think the main reason against allowing for tag phrases is
>> >> complexity. You are increasing the complexity both on the user input
>> >> side as well as on the retrieval side and for what I consider a
>> >> marginal benefit. On the UI side of things I think it's confusing to
>> >> many users to allow for quoted phrases. Then on the retrieval side
>> >> you are also confusing things because how do you get at the url for
>> >> "modern art"? /tags/modern%2Bart ... that's not something users can
>> >> type in by hand which is part of what's nice about forcing single
>> >> word tags.
>> >>
>> >> As for Elias' suggestion of allowing phrases and converting the
>> >> spaces to underscores, I think that's a little dicey. For one, it
>> >> still leaves the user confusion aspect around using quoted phrases,
>> >> which I believe most users don't really want. On the technical side
>> >> I think you may be playing with fire though because why should the
>> >> tag "modern art" become modern_art instead of modern-art. And
>> >> regardless of which you convert to, is that the value stored in the
>> >> db? That would mean that when the user comes back to that entry the
>> >> tags list will show modern_art instead of their original tag phrase
>> >> which can be confusing for users as well.
>> >>
>> >> My belief is that the reason why tagging has been successful at
>> >> places like del.icio.us and flickr is because the rules are short and
>> >> simple. Tags are separated by spaces, period. It's a slight blow in
>> >> functionality but keeps the usability as simple and easy as possible.
>> >>
>> >> -- Allen
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Anil Gangolli wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Oh. I must have missed the discussion about not supporting spaces
>> >>> in tags because I would at least have made an attempt to convince
>> >>> people to support spaces in tags.
>> >>>
>> >>> It comes up for tags like "modern art" that are not really
>> >>> meaningful to separate.
>> >>>
>> >>> Regarding Elias's proposal, I initially felt against it, because I'd
>> >>> rather use real spaces in the tags. That's still the case, but less
>> >>> so, because I did a quick Technorati sampling, and there already
>> >>> seems to be a sizable rift between the true space users and the
>> >>> underscore users.
>> >>>
>> >>> So for example Technorati lists 494 posts using "modern_art"
>> >>> compared to 981 using "modern art" and differences in the thousands
>> >>> for "george bush" compared to "george_bush", with the latter tag far
>> >>> in the lead.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --a.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Elias Torres" <el...@torrez.us>
>> >>> To: <ro...@incubator.apache.org>
>> >>> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 4:09 PM
>> >>> Subject: Re: Apache Roller 3.1RC1 (incubating) ready for testing
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Allen Gilliland wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Anil Gangolli wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> I installed 3.1RC1 on my dev box. Seemed to be clean using a
>> >>>>>> fresh db
>> >>>>>> installation and 3.0 required-jars package.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> I was trying the tag-related functionality out and I see a few
>> >>>>>> issues:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> (1) The tag entry field on the entry edit page uses space
>> >>>>>> separation
>> >>>>>> and doesn't seem to accomodate tags that include spaces. I tried
>> >>>>>> quoting with double-quotes; that didn't seem to work.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Yes, that is the expected behavior. We talked about this when we
>> >>>>> were
>> >>>>> evaluating the tags proposal and decided that most sites seem
>> to be
>> >>>>> using the solution that we have, where tags cannot be multi word
>> >>>>> phrases.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I now have a requirement at IBM to support spaces with the
>> following
>> >>>> caveat. If you enter "elias is cool" it will be stored as
>> >>>> elias_is_cool.
>> >>>> In other words, we support it as an input (double quotes) but we
>> don't
>> >>>> store it that way. Are you guys cool with it?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> -Elias
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> (2) The user guide link in the JSP footer seems to point off to
>> >>>>>> an old
>> >>>>>> 2.x guide. I was looking for and couldn't find the
>> documentation in
>> >>>>>> the 3.1 guides on the various forms of URLs, specifically I was
>> >>>>>> looking to test the tag-based URLs. I know I've seen it
>> somewhere,
>> >>>>>> but I can't remember where.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Hmm. For the user guide I think it would be nice if these
>> kinds of
>> >>>>> links pointed to urls within the app, like /roller-ui/docs/*, for
>> >>>>> user
>> >>>>> documentation about the current app version.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I may also take this opportunity to throw out an idea I had a
>> little
>> >>>>> while ago for documentation that was related to this. It seems
>> to me
>> >>>>> that since blogging is supposed to website publishing made easy
>> >>>>> then one
>> >>>>> of the key components of a really mature blog system would be good
>> >>>>> documentation throughout the application. I haven't been a big
>> >>>>> documentation contributor in the past, but I think that's more
>> >>>>> because I
>> >>>>> felt the app needed more work and less docs at the time. Now that
>> >>>>> the
>> >>>>> app is getting more and more mature it may be time to consider
>> a nice
>> >>>>> solution for providing rich documentation.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> So what I had been thinking about was a way where we could write
>> >>>>> all of
>> >>>>> our documentation in small and easily reusable components,
>> >>>>> possibly in
>> >>>>> xml, which we could easily use to either 1) provide a full help
>> guide
>> >>>>> document (aka user guide) or 2) take bits and pieces of the docs
>> >>>>> and be
>> >>>>> able to insert them directly into the appropriate pages.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> So for example, if a user is on the 'Templates' page and is
>> >>>>> working on
>> >>>>> customizing their blog then we could have some documentation hooks
>> >>>>> which
>> >>>>> provide contextual help info like ...
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 1. what is this page for?
>> >>>>> 2. what can i do on this page?
>> >>>>> 3. how do i use this page?
>> >>>>> 4. what do each of the fields on this page mean?
>> >>>>> 5. how does this affect my blog?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> So for the 'Templates' page the top of the page may provide quick
>> >>>>> links
>> >>>>> which give a couple paragraphs of text explaining what the page is
>> >>>>> for
>> >>>>> and what you do on the page. Then you have the large text area
>> where
>> >>>>> you can modify your templates which could have a little tool
>> tip icon
>> >>>>> next to it which would tell the user what that field is for. Then
>> >>>>> possibly at the bottom of the page we include a quick reference
>> >>>>> sheet of
>> >>>>> the models and macros to help users while they are authoring
>> >>>>> templates.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> One of the things that I think Roller has been hurting on is
>> >>>>> usability
>> >>>>> and in my mind of the most important elements of usability when it
>> >>>>> comes
>> >>>>> to web tools is contextual documentation. I think doing something
>> >>>>> like
>> >>>>> this could really help make Roller a more user friendly blogging
>> >>>>> system.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> (3) Tags don't seem to be displayed anywhere in the "basic"
>> theme at
>> >>>>>> all. Shouldn't we update this to show tags on entries,
>> including an
>> >>>>>> actual rel tag ?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I think there may not have been any real consensus about whether
>> >>>>> or not
>> >>>>> to promote tags in the themes since in many cases users may not be
>> >>>>> using
>> >>>>> tags.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> (4) I couldn't get anything to show up in the "Hot Tags" area
>> of the
>> >>>>>> front page. Haven't investigated what is happening yet; this
>> may be
>> >>>>>> my own problem.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Dunno about that one.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> -- Allen
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> --a.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave" <sn...@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>> To: <ro...@incubator.apache.org>
>> >>>>>> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 5:57 PM
>> >>>>>> Subject: Apache Roller 3.1RC1 (incubating) ready for testing
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Thank you and yes, I meant 3.1.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> With releasing 3.1, re-releasing 2.3.1 and working on 3.2 I've
>> >>>>>>> got a
>> >>>>>>> couple
>> >>>>>>> too many versions floating around in my head.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> - Dave
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On 11/20/06, Jeffrey Blattman <Je...@sun.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>> did you mean 3.1 RC1, or are we skipping 3.1?
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Dave wrote:
>> >>>>>>>> > I've merged all applicable bug fixes from trunk to the
>> >>>>>>>> roller_3.1
>> >>>>>>>> > branch and prepared a first release candidate for the 3.1
>> >>>>>>>> release.
>> >>>>>>>> You
>> >>>>>>>> > can find the release files and latest 3.1 docs here:
>> >>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>> > http://people.apache.org/~snoopdave/apache-roller-3.1/
>> >>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>> > Here's the What's New in Roller 3.1 page:
>> >>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>>
>> http://rollerweblogger.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=Roller_3.1_WhatsNew
>> >>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>> > Release candidates are for testing purposes only.
>> >>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>> > Please help out. The sooner you download, test and report
>> >>>>>>>> bugs the
>> >>>>>>>> > sooner we'll be able to fix them and get the release out. So
>> >>>>>>>> please
>> >>>>>>>> > help out the project and take RC1 for a spin.
>> >>>>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>>> > - Dave
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >
>>
>> --
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> *David Levy *
>> *Principal Engineer*
>> *Sun Microsystems Ltd.*
>> 55, King William St.,
>> London EC4R 9ND
>> United Kingdom
>>
>>
>> Phone +44 (0) 20 7469 9908/x18308
>> Mobile +44 (0) 7710-360922
>>
>> Blog http://blogs.sun.com/DaveLevy
>> Email David.Levy@Sun.COM
>>
>> Sun Proprietary & Confidential . This e-mail message is for the sole use
>> of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and
>> privilidged information. Any unauthorised review, use, disclosure or
>> distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recepient,
>> please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the
>> original message.
>>
>>
--
Dave
*David Levy *
*Principal Engineer*
*Sun Microsystems Ltd.*
55, King William St.,
London EC4R 9ND
United Kingdom
Phone +44 (0) 20 7469 9908/x18308
Mobile +44 (0) 7710-360922
Blog http://blogs.sun.com/DaveLevy
Email David.Levy@Sun.COM
Sun Proprietary & Confidential . This e-mail message is for the sole use
of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and
privilidged information. Any unauthorised review, use, disclosure or
distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recepient,
please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the
original message.