What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
See the new YouTube feature trailer for Dragon Age: Origins view!
youtube.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
42 Comments
- praisethelard, on 06/06/2008, -3/+43if (exists('nsfw_attribute'))
{
download_site();
} - D3koy, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15Genius...
- xxiduggulameo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11i wanted to shoot this down as a terrible idea but it's actually a pretty darn good one. I think "adult" or something like that would catch on more quickly than "nsfw" though.
- masamunecyrus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Here's some real code you can actually use:
function format_nsfw(){
var nsfw_url=document.getElementsByTagName('a');
for (var i=0; i<nsfw_url.length; i++) {
if (nsfw_url[i].rel != 'nsfw') continue;
nsfw_url[i].style.border="1px dashed red";
}
}
Then just run "format_nsfw()" on onLoad, or some such, and it will stylize all of the "rel='nsfw'" links (in this case, it gives them a dashed red border). - praisethelard, on 06/06/2008, -4/+8masamunecyrus, stop trying so hard.
- Naga10, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I'm sure not everyone is as heartless as you. Five year olds really need to see the hardcore porn, amirite?
It's a good idea. - mhuggins, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I agree. "adult", "mature", or something more specific to what the content actually is would me much better considering the links that this attribute is in regards to are also NSFC (not safe for children), NSFS (not safe for school), or whatever the heck else you want to take into a account. The reason they are considered to be not safe in these conditions is because the content is intended for mature audiences.
All in all, not a bad idea though, although only useful if supported by those developing the sites. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The content provider would only have to put that stuff on pages that you wouldn't want to send to the people at work. Doing this would give your users a benefit and perhaps there would be some link that would send you back to the previous page etc., so that you wouldn't be left out in the cold? And these "content" providers are only trying to give a better experience for the end user.
And what about content on some pages that isn't safe for work while some of the other stuff is safe for work? Frames. Just put the NSFW stuff in a frame and that'd solve the problem. - Yaanu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Actually, now that I think about it, it could be coded the same as a spoiler tag. When you hover the cursor over the link, it starts to flash epileptically NSFW in bold, and when you click the javascript pop-up shows with the URL and confirmination of acceptance.
Now if I only knew how to code. I fail at geek.
(Reply to that last part and get dugg DOW-UHN) - headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2That's kind of what I was thinking. The nice thing about the rel="nofollow" attribute, is it can be applied to links automatically by software. The content creator doesn't have to do anything.
A rel="nsfw" attribute on the other hand could never be automatically added to links by software, because some blogging software has no clue what's safe for work, and what isn't. That leaves the attribute use in the hands of the content creators, and god knows most people are lazy and won't bother with it.
The rel="nofollow" attribute would have never taken off, if people had to add it to anchor tags by hand. - masamunecyrus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@inbred:
I like to code. That's why I am reading about html news, instead of reading the newspaper. >_> - Yaanu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2< nsfw > Click here to receive a pop-up warning thou about a NSFW link... eth. < / nsfw >
Or BBCode! [ nsfw ] (insert random blasphemy here) [ / nsfw ] - CasaMan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It wouldn't be a smart idea for search engines to mark content NSFW based on the backlinks the content gets..
If i would create many backlinks to a scource and mark them NSFW the scource could be hurt.. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Yeah, but how many web designers would ACTUALLY USE this tag? I mean, they want their content to be seen by everyone possible, right? Seems this would in effect deliberately reduce their audience, what's the incentive in doing that?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think an nsfw element could be used in conjunction too.
The browser could display a message in place of content inside nsfw tags (similar to noscript).
It would be annoying to click on a link and have it do nothing. - pjdoland, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The spec for the directive has already been updated to address input from the community:
http://pj.doland.org/archives/041577.php - pjdoland, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2For block-level elements, the idea still puts control in the hands of the content creator. The result of this approach would probably be better than the current crop of word-based filters that we currently have.
Some people believe in disclosure. I don't mind letting people know in advance that they might want to not continue onto a particular link. - psykr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Only the people who currently put [NSFW] on things will use the tag. Also, how do you determine what's NSFW?
There are too many problems with this; besides, HTML is supposed to be for *markup*, not ethics (or whatever this falls under). - AmbushCommander, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If you read the proposal carefully, you would have noticed that the dude is not proposing a new "attribute" per-say, but another role for the standards-compliant rel attribute. Microformats has been doing this for a while now.
- BabyBrumak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1While that would require a revision to the HTML processing, it could work quite well. By incorporating the < nsfw > tag, you could easily set up a browser to filter only those sections on the pages.
- diggmichi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1After reading this AWESOME idea, I wrote a library that does exactly this. It took me about 3 hours.
http://digg.com/programming/NSFW_HTML_Attribute_JS_Library_Ready_for_Download - darkbird, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2good in theory, bad in practice
- Ookware, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It's due to still being in the hands of the content creator it wouldn't work on its own. However the way porn sites use "Are you over 18" and use rating systems on the sites show that some do make an effort. Maybe working together with filter software this would be a good idea.
It would also help if it somehow looked different so before you clicked on a link you could know what was coming, rather than clicking a "bad" link when someone else has view of your monitor - TwoPiThirds, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Current word-based filtering products and nsfw tags have different purposes -- filters attempt to block the user's requests for objectionable content, but tagging something NSFW enables the user to avoid requesting objectionable content.
Even if it is not implemented universally, NSFW tagging provides added value to users by protecting them from being caught requesting objectionable content by their corporate firewall. - m00kie, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2it's got a "frosty mug taste" to it. nice.
- andrewvc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0There's already the ICRA ( http://www.icra.org/webmasters/ ). They provide quite a few ways to do this. In addition, you can use digimarc to add metadata to individual image files about this stuff.
Why is it not used that much? It's a pain. - squarehappy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is a very cool idea, but wouldn't it require the browser developers to implement the "nsfw" attribute as well? How many employers give you free reign to install Firefox with Greasemonkey on your work computer? More likely, you're using a locked-down version of IE. Since they just released IE7, we probably won't see a new iteration this decade, and it's not likely that the employer would upgrade anyway.
Frustrating how long it takes for these good ideas to go mainstream, if they ever do. We just celebrated 10 years of CSS and people still have the "table layout ain't broke so don't fix it" mentality. - pjdoland, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This idea is much simpler, and lacks the ICRA bureaucracy. Plus, with support in newer browsers for attribute selectors in CSS, site administrators could serve an alternate stylesheet that hides content very easily.
- dblyth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Yeah, not to be the buzz-kill, but if you're in need of blocking lots of page elements because they aren't work safe, maybe you should just avoid that site.
- eargang, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0While I think the concept is genius, I think using rel is, from a semantics p.o.v., cleaner. Also, the popularity of rel (partly thanks to the aforementioned microformats) might be something you want to ride the coattails of.
- TwoPiThirds, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4One problem with tagging NSFW content is that a single link to NSFW content can contaminate an entire page of primarily work-safe content. If the nsfw attribute is adopted, many companies will implement the wholesale blocking of sites that link to NSFW content (as suggested above by winrules). Once this happens, content providers will need to implement their own server-side filtering, removing all NSFW content to allow their readers to access the work-safe portion of their content.
Event if a content provider used the NSFW attribute on their server to help serve up work-safe pages, it would be in that provider's best interest to avoid sending the NSFW tags on to any end user --- hiding the NSFW tags from the end user allows the provider to create work-safe versions of its content without making it trivial for firewalls to determine that the original version was NSFW. - mike503, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0yeah - why not use this in some fashion alongside ICRA...
this also assumes the person who posted the link labeled it properly to begin with (i.e. CARES that people will know it's adult)
this actually is an example of microformats, in a way:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microformats - eargang, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Skyshock: Yeah, but how many web designers would ACTUALLY USE this tag? I mean, they want their content to be seen by everyone possible, right?
Not really. Say you're peddling porn - if your potential customer accidentally gets your smut on his screen at work, he'll either get fired or do the OH ***** ALT F4 routine. Neither will make it very likely that he'll ever return to your site. - Artcfox, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1That's actually a very good point!
Say someone were to surf a site that has porn on their work computer. Even though the browser might not display the NSFW content, it will still be downloaded, and cached. And if filtering software finds it the person can be in some real trouble.
Though, one could browse porn all day at work, and if caught they can just say they are using a browser that doesn't show any of the NSFW content... hmm... maybe this isn't such a bad idea after all... ;) - menatas, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Good luck getting the W3C to add this to the spec, which boss would allow a Not Safe For Work tag? :P
- rusty0101, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1nsfw would be the simple tag, additional tags could be added specifying why it would be nsfw, so if your company has nothing against bikini's, or topless, but can't stand thongs or full nudity, that could be qualified. Likewise if your country or company has no problem discussing violence, but can't handle affection between consenting adults, that could be handled as well.
The nsfw tag would be a catch all, that whomever submits the material can set then based upon actual content other tags may apply. I would not be surprised if nsfw got applied to a lot of material that people in some companies would say, "wtf, why is that nsfw?" - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1die
- danimal84, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1genius, brilliant, this is the perfect example i believe was written about recenlty in PC mag and talked about a lot before but how metadata that can add another layer to the internet, such as just a tag that a browser at work to guarantee can filter and use that you can guarantee you won't get introuble at work. takes the thinking out of it which makes it easier while probably making us duber but anyway..... cooool
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2New content blocker code:
if (exists('nsfw_atribute'))
{
block_site();
} - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2GENIUS!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -13/+0comment #2
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -13/+0Comment #1
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is