What is Digg?11 Comments
- daborg, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Why would you digg something when you don't know what it means? That makes no sense.
- ronin691, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5The article is pretty much a mirror of the Microformats site ( http://microformats.org/about/ ), but dugg for the subject matter. To learn more about Microformats go to Tantek's blog, he is the authority on the subject:
http://tantek.com/ - nyx210, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Hmm... the article didn't say anything about the limitations... This sounds like something that could be heavily abused by spammers and robots.
- gauthierm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The intended improvement with Microformats is that they are expressed inside plain-old XHTML and can be rendered by any web-browser rather than needing an RDF/OWL browser.
- thermus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3How do these formats differ from exisiting RDF/OWL data encoding schemes (which, in theory, allows automated inferencing across disparate data sets)? Are they reinventing the wheel here or actually improving on it?
- op12, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Seriously, it's only the *entire point* of the article to explain it.
"This post is supposed to give you an idea, what Microformats actually mean, which advantages they have and how you can use them to enrich your content and make it more visible and understandable for search engines." - omegapoint, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I think the concept would be useful to the handicapped as well, allowing, for example, the blind to sift through the tags to find the content they want rather than waiting half an hour for a screen reader to go through a cluttered web page. The downside though is the same as it is for metadata and web services. To use the data these formats describe means that you are relying on someone else's website to be updated and in a consistent format (after all, the ultimate point is to more accurately classify and link other people's data). Unless it's a large company like Amazon offering the service (like web services) you just can't count on the info being there. I'm afraid the only people who will keep up with this are SEO consultants and spammers (metadata).
- sorbix, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1This does not constitute the computer "understanding" the content. It is simply a philosophical mistake to say so.
- KarmasAgent, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2I Dugg it because I understand it. ;)
Look into Ontological understanding and Semantic classification. You'll get it. - Nekko17, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1OOPS!
- Nekko17, on 10/12/2007, -18/+2I wonder how many people dugg this and didn't even understand what it meant.
I'm one of them.
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is