billroper: (Default)
billroper ([personal profile] billroper) wrote2005-06-15 09:53 pm
Entry tags:

Testing Tags

My brother-in-law, Jeff, just posted on his long-standing weblog a list of features that would make up the ideal blogging environment. Since his blog doesn't yet allow permalinks, I'm going to copy that text here:

Each day's entry should be stored as a separate record (including HTML markup) in both the client-side and server-side databases.
Each record should have a field for year, for month, for date, and for hour posted. There are people who post multiple entries in a day, and although I have rarely wanted to do that, in some circumstances it could be useful.
Each record should have a field for an author-defined metadata tag, indicating what category a given entry belongs to. (I'll come back to tags a little later.)
Both client and server should have a mechanism for creating a view of the blog entries by filtering on both the time-posted fields and the metadata tags.
Some configurability of blog page elements (header, navigation, blogroll, archive, daily entries) is good, but I don't require infinite flexibility.
Automatic RSS generation.
A right-clickable icon somewhere in each entry, allowing readers to "lift" a database query URL in order to link to an individual entry.


Now, I have no idea what the data storage is like for LJ. But it looks like -- with tags -- this satisfies the other requirements on his list.

So let's tag this entry for "relatives" and "Jeff" and see what we get. :)

[identity profile] backrubbear.livejournal.com 2005-06-16 02:40 pm (UTC)(link)
I looked a bit into the internals of LJ a while ago when I had a few free moments. I think all of the stuff is inside. Some of the views he wants aren't there. The current views, mostly reverse-temporal order, is optimized for their server farms and caching methodology.

The code is there for the hacking.

I'm not certain about the tags. Hopefully they are implemented better than the security/friend group feature. I'm 3/4 convinced there is a potential issue there, but I'd need to see the code for the situations where you delete an existing group. The proof of concept experiment, if I had the time, wouldn't take too long.

The problem comes down to the fact that friend groups are represented as a bit vector. There's 30 (or 31) bits available.

What happens when you delete a group mapping?