Re: [syndication] Re: SuperOpenRatings

["S. Mike Dierken" <mike@knownow.com>]

One interesting twist to unique IDs is what Ohaha does. (Ohaha is a P2P
content thingee like Gnutella.)
They essentially use a checksum of the first couple hundred kilobytes of the
media file - this avoid the problem of misspelled titles & spam content
posing as new media.

I don't know what the canonical 'checksum' for a news item would be. If it
were based on the actual content of the article, then the article could be
served up by various sources, with various annoying banner ads surrounding
it, and there would be a common way to reference
discussions/ratings/corrections/etc.

Mike

----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert A. Lentz" <ralentz@ralentz.com>
To: <syndication@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: [syndication] Re: SuperOpenRatings


> At 05:24 PM 2/5/01, you wrote:
> >I suggested that we add IDs to RSS 0.9x so that ratings would remain
> >persistent.
>
> Seems to me that we already have self generating unique IDs present:
>
>          - The channel can uniquely be identified by the link, if not the
> title.
>
>          - The story can uniquely be identified by the link, if not the
title.
>
> (Perhaps an element needs to be added to provide the author of each item,
> but then the author's name/URL/etc. would be the unique identifier there I
> imagine.)
>
> Seems to me that anything which does not reuse one of these elements as
> part of the ID would add a cumbersome centralization, for the ID
> repository, to the process.
>
> And why reuse the information when we can already just use what is
present?
>
> Or am I totally off base?
> -Robert
>
> --
> ralentz@ralentz.com
> Andrea:   Unhappy the land that has no heroes.
> Galileo:  No, unhappy the land that *needs* heroes.
>                                      -- Bertolt Brecht, "Life of Galileo"
>
>
>