How might we define, as a community, suggested formats for the "tunneling" of weblog posts? For example, I quote Sebastian, who is quoting David...how does someone who looks at my post make sense of the whole concept? I am only now getting used to the disjointed conversations that take place in this medium.
Some of the most experienced bloggers, like Dave Winer, very seldom include much of another person's post at all...they simply refer to their comments and let the reader follow the hyperlink to digest the reference.
I've found that viewing threads of a conversation are much easier in my RSS aggregator, but only if the responses occur in a timely manner. A reply taken out of context by a long pause can be quite confusing if it isn't referenced properly. So that brings me back to my original question: can we come up with a proposed citation standard? Should we?
One last thought: is there any value in attempting to catalog various "types" of weblog posts (e.g. Announcement, Commentary/Critique, Conversation (Meme), etc.) and developing styles for citations that match the purpose of a post? Just thinking out loud...
2:57:03 PM 
|
|
