Comments on: Feedback in Feeds http://crschmidt.net/blog/78/feedback-in-feeds/ Ramblings of a GIS Hacker Thu, 20 Nov 2008 00:13:26 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: kasei http://crschmidt.net/blog/78/feedback-in-feeds/#comment-2040 kasei Mon, 06 Jun 2005 05:32:25 +0000 http://crschmidt.net/blog/archives/78/feedback-in-feeds/#comment-2040 FWIW, I'm in NNW right now, and it would seem to have access to cookies, since all the fields above were pre-filled. FWIW, I’m in NNW right now, and it would seem to have access to cookies, since all the fields above were pre-filled.

]]> By: Christopher Schmidt http://crschmidt.net/blog/78/feedback-in-feeds/#comment-2034 Christopher Schmidt Sun, 05 Jun 2005 22:41:59 +0000 http://crschmidt.net/blog/archives/78/feedback-in-feeds/#comment-2034 Mark: I'd already thought about the NNW-like stuff, and was aware that it could be a problem. I don't have NNW (no money) so I can't test with it, unfortunately. What it really comes down to is that the metadata for who it's from isn't vitally important: it's nice, but half the time people didn't fill out the homepage box anyway. In reality, a large chunk of my readers come through web based aggregators. Of the estimated ~100 regular readers I get via RSS, 30 come from bloglines, 35 come from LiveJournal. A large chunk of my readers also come through http://planet.swhack.com/ or http://planetrdf.com/: both of which will have the user's cookies stored, assuming they're reading on those pages. I'm not sure if these kind of browsers use completely seperate cookie sets, or disable them altogether. If it's the former, they can use the "info" link to set a cookie within the aggregator, one would think, if there's some way to open a link inside the aggregator. The (info) link both gives information (What is this?) and lets you set it (via the form). The more important part to me is the first paragraph, which just outlines what exactly this goofy form is doing in the post for people who are new to the weblog. It's not the most intutive thing in the world, I'll admit, but it is better than the nothing I had before. Mark: I’d already thought about the NNW-like stuff, and was aware that it could be a problem. I don’t have NNW (no money) so I can’t test with it, unfortunately. What it really comes down to is that the metadata for who it’s from isn’t vitally important: it’s nice, but half the time people didn’t fill out the homepage box anyway.

In reality, a large chunk of my readers come through web based aggregators. Of the estimated ~100 regular readers I get via RSS, 30 come from bloglines, 35 come from LiveJournal. A large chunk of my readers also come through http://planet.swhack.com/ or http://planetrdf.com/: both of which will have the user’s cookies stored, assuming they’re reading on those pages.

I’m not sure if these kind of browsers use completely seperate cookie sets, or disable them altogether. If it’s the former, they can use the “info” link to set a cookie within the aggregator, one would think, if there’s some way to open a link inside the aggregator.

The (info) link both gives information (What is this?) and lets you set it (via the form). The more important part to me is the first paragraph, which just outlines what exactly this goofy form is doing in the post for people who are new to the weblog. It’s not the most intutive thing in the world, I’ll admit, but it is better than the nothing I had before.

]]> By: Mark Eichin http://crschmidt.net/blog/78/feedback-in-feeds/#comment-2033 Mark Eichin Sun, 05 Jun 2005 20:28:40 +0000 http://crschmidt.net/blog/archives/78/feedback-in-feeds/#comment-2033 One issue: my browser has these cookies, sure - but I don't think NetNewsWire does (although it does use webkit, and in an earlier release *did* have cookies and password info from the browser, apparently that was fixed as a bug...) and I wouldn't expect most of the non-browser-but-still-html-based clients to have them either. (This was something that came up in Russell Beattie's version of the experiment, although the more problematic discovery was that for actually comments, you really *did* want people to read other comments first.) Also, it never occurred to me that "more info" was to *give* more info, rather than to *get* more info, which is what it usually means... One issue: my browser has these cookies, sure - but I don’t think NetNewsWire does (although it does use webkit, and in an earlier release *did* have cookies and password info from the browser, apparently that was fixed as a bug…) and I wouldn’t expect most of the non-browser-but-still-html-based clients to have them either. (This was something that came up in Russell Beattie’s version of the experiment, although the more problematic discovery was that for actually comments, you really *did* want people to read other comments first.)

Also, it never occurred to me that “more info” was to *give* more info, rather than to *get* more info, which is what it usually means…

]]>