Difference between revisions of "Talk:Landmarks and Navigation Project"
Dale Innis (talk | contribs) (New section: Corrected some errors) |
Dale Innis (talk | contribs) (New section: Restated idea about Picks) |
||
Line 85: | Line 85: | ||
I've corrected some errors in the (former) "Should we move Landmarks out of inventory?" section (including renaming it); it seems to have been originally written without an accurate knowledge of how landmarks currently work. In particular, Landmarks are not all in one huge list (this is true only of Landmarks that the user has made himself, and has not moved into other folders), and the names are not useless (they contain the region and parcel name, which is often exactly the right thing). The current inventory provides a powerful way (folders) to sort and organize landmarks, and this was not reflected in the existing "Food for Thought". This being a Wiki, I assume this sort of improvement is okay. :) -- [[User:Dale Innis|Dale Innis]] 06:54, 30 September 2008 (PDT) | I've corrected some errors in the (former) "Should we move Landmarks out of inventory?" section (including renaming it); it seems to have been originally written without an accurate knowledge of how landmarks currently work. In particular, Landmarks are not all in one huge list (this is true only of Landmarks that the user has made himself, and has not moved into other folders), and the names are not useless (they contain the region and parcel name, which is often exactly the right thing). The current inventory provides a powerful way (folders) to sort and organize landmarks, and this was not reflected in the existing "Food for Thought". This being a Wiki, I assume this sort of improvement is okay. :) -- [[User:Dale Innis|Dale Innis]] 06:54, 30 September 2008 (PDT) | ||
== Restated idea about Picks == | |||
Residents love Picks; talking about "deprecating" them will just anger people (with good reason). What's really being talked about here is better linking Picks and Landmarks. So I've reworded (and renamed) that section to reflect that. |
Revision as of 06:00, 30 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Why start with a outdated bookmark model that doesn't scale properly after many years of use.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.
--Prokofy Neva 21:20, 29 September 2008 (PDT)
Do Not Destroy User Generated Content
My mind absolutely boggles at the thought that you would want to get rid of User Picks.
This is *resident content*. *You do not get to destroy resident content*.
Deprecate picks? In favour of landmarks that will be shareable somehow? (when you're going to remove them out of the inventory? and have them shareable as...what exactly? how? off a browser? all of them at once?)
Why? People go to enormous trouble to make their Picks. It's the heart of their identity. I know as a landlord in SL that people record all kinds of special moments as well as places they like on their picks. The picks are *not just places*. The picks are a *story*. The picks have things like descriptions of your best friends. Or your business policies. Or information about using your product.
Could you people *look at how these things are actually used inworld* before you set about destroying them?!
There's no objective need to remove a page off the avatar, used to put his best selection of picks/story pages he wants to tell about his Second Life, in favour of some giant grab bug of landmarks, that does not tell that narrative.
Can you grasp that Picks are not just bookmarked spots, but *a story*? Can you please see this narrative on thousands of people and not tamper with it?!
I fail to see why your need to tinker with the viewer involves destroying what is already established *as user-generated content*. Try to remember that's what it is: *user-generated content*. Linden Lab should not be in the business of "deprecating" *user-generated content* under the guise of "new easier-to-use features".
--Prokofy Neva 21:31, 29 September 2008 (PDT)
Corrected some errors
I've corrected some errors in the (former) "Should we move Landmarks out of inventory?" section (including renaming it); it seems to have been originally written without an accurate knowledge of how landmarks currently work. In particular, Landmarks are not all in one huge list (this is true only of Landmarks that the user has made himself, and has not moved into other folders), and the names are not useless (they contain the region and parcel name, which is often exactly the right thing). The current inventory provides a powerful way (folders) to sort and organize landmarks, and this was not reflected in the existing "Food for Thought". This being a Wiki, I assume this sort of improvement is okay. :) -- Dale Innis 06:54, 30 September 2008 (PDT)
Restated idea about Picks
Residents love Picks; talking about "deprecating" them will just anger people (with good reason). What's really being talked about here is better linking Picks and Landmarks. So I've reworded (and renamed) that section to reflect that.