Difference between revisions of "Talk:Landmarks and Navigation Project"
Prokofy Neva (talk | contribs) |
Prokofy Neva (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
Rather than duplicating the body of the message here, I'm merely pasting the link to the mailing list post: https://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/2008-August/011304.html | Rather than duplicating the body of the message here, I'm merely pasting the link to the mailing list post: https://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/2008-August/011304.html | ||
<br />[[User:SignpostMarv Martin|SignpostMarv Martin]] 08:17, 10 August 2008 (PDT) | <br />[[User:SignpostMarv Martin|SignpostMarv Martin]] 08:17, 10 August 2008 (PDT) | ||
== Removing Landmarks as Shareable Objects Destroys Socialability and Commerce == | |||
This concept of removing landmarks as objects in the inventory -- and in fact removing them as objects in the world -- is all wrong. | This concept of removing landmarks as objects in the inventory -- and in fact removing them as objects in the world -- is all wrong. |
Revision as of 20:20, 29 September 2008
Del.icio.us for SL
Why start with a outdated bookmark model that doesn't scale properly after many years of use. Most people that I know have so many bookmarks in their browser that they stopped using them. Wouldn't it be better to just start with a tagging model at the heart of this, instead of shoving that of as some future feature?
Tags make searching for land/book marks much easier, specifically when you made them long ago and don't remember the exact name of the place, but do know it was a shop that sold red shoes and umbrellas. And lets remember bookmarks are used for storing place you wish to find on a later date, shouldn't you use the best system that helps people find things?
I don't know (yet) if there is any opensource bookmark tagging software, but I really think that should be looked into. That way most of the development can be offloaded to web devs, and api's could be created for people to create plugins for social networking sites, blogs, etc.
You could also opt to use del.icio.us as the place where landmarks are saved, but that would make us depended on their service, which doesn't have to be a bad thing. Or see if LL can buy a license of their software and neatly hook it up with Second Life. (Or any other bookmark tagging service can be used)
Frans 10:50, 23 April 2008 (PDT)
1. Move landmarks out of inventory? No! Landmarks as inventory items that can be passed around is a powerful metaphor.
2. Deprecate picks? Picks are my "home page" (no, I'm not going to put a web home page in my profile ... or use anyone else's ... not until LL provides hosting for it).
3. Extend web search further into SL? Not to replace landmarks, see #1.
4. The #1 thing I want is to be able to limit what landmarks show up in the map landmarks pulldown to the ones in my Landmarks folder, so it doesn't get cluttered up with dozens of duplicate "hi, you bought something at my shop, now I get to spam your map" landmarks.
Argent Stonecutter 04:46, 20 May 2008 (PDT)
Landmarks: "Tradeable assets"
If landmarks are moved out of the inventory altogether (I'm a bit undecided about it; in-world, I tend to pass SLURLs more frequently, since it's far easier to open the map, create a SLURL, and copy & paste it to someone who's waiting for it in IM — to do the same for landmarks would require me to drop everything I'm doing, teleport to the destination, create a landmark, and come back), can we have a simple way of passing them as assets somehow?
They might work like the del.icio.us suggestion above, of course: a way for residents to exchange SLURLs and have them stored "somewhere" (many of us use SL on different locations with different hardware and it's nice to know that landmarks are currently persistent — stored on the grid), and easily loaded back into the client when needed. Sort of like what .Mac does for Safari, Foxmarks for FireFox, or, well, del.icio.us for pretty much any browser.
Gwyneth Llewelyn 07:55, 30 May 2008 (PDT)
I agree that landmarks as a tradeble assests would be prefered, perhaps the inventory item could be a just a pointer to the landmark in the new landmark system.
Frans 11:56, 31 May 2008 (PDT)
Rather than duplicating the body of the message here, I'm merely pasting the link to the mailing list post: https://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/2008-August/011304.html
SignpostMarv Martin 08:17, 10 August 2008 (PDT)
This concept of removing landmarks as objects in the inventory -- and in fact removing them as objects in the world -- is all wrong.
Would you *please* stop trying to make this interactive 3-D virtual world "like a web page browser"? It's *not a web page*. It's a *world*.
You will really destroy commerce models already thriving inworld if you remove landmarks as an object that can be put in prims. Every single business in SL uses landmark giver objects onsite or in ads or gives people landmarks as part of their advertising. And that's all good.
The idea that you "can't find or use" the landmarks in inventory is false. Of course you can find them. You use "search inventory" with the name of the store or sim and the landmark is found in the search.
People constantly hand each other landmarks to interesting places precisely because there isn't enough space on the Picks. By putting these "bookmarking" functions into a browser, you remove the sharability. How will I share my landmarks if I can't push them as inventory to other people, individually?!
Again, SL is *not a web page*. It's a 3-D interactive social world that has objects in it that people share and move. Landmarks are one of them. They are sharable sortable objects and inventory access them just fine now.
It's noted in the design description that removing landmarks from the data base will be some kind of "save" for the dbase. Is that what this is all about? It doesn't seem warranted if it kills of interactivity and commerce, exchanging that robustness of socialibility and economic life for a static solo-user's experience of his own bookmarks.