| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

CaretNotes

This version was saved 13 years, 5 months ago View current version     Page history
Saved by Tantek
on December 6, 2010 at 6:11:24 pm
 

A proposal for end/foot-notes for constrained mediums such as Twitter.

 

Summary

 

Use ^n to indicate a reference, and n^URL to supply the reference in a tweet. E.g.:

 

 

Examples

Text only

5 player Evo^1 with 4 Brits and now Carcassonne^2 #gamesnight 1^http://ttk.me/i/a/2wvJbL 2^http://ttk.me/i/a/kVzM

 

(as actually tweeted - and original)

 

Text only with auto-embeds

after watching trailer^1 and E3 demo^2, ordering TRON Evolution for XBOX 360 http://ttk.me/i/a/B9EFnW videos: 1^http://youtu.be/rxIR9wlQS_w 2^http://youtu.be/M3dHhPmfSpw

 

(as actually tweeted - and original with embeds inline)

 

 

Alternatives considered

 

For end-citations/expansions, there is established practice in the web design/development communities (most W3C mailing lists e.g. http://lists.w3.org/ , see examples at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2002Sep/0067.html ) of using bracketed numbers like [1] [2] in plain text media to provide footnotes which can be used for either explanations, citations, or both.

 

I don't know the origins of the bracket end/foot-note reference, but presumably it's due to limitations of the plain text medium (no superscripts) compared to print, and a desire to not overload traditional means of superscripting in plain text, e.g. the "^" for exponents. 

 

In a constrained medium such as Twitter where every byte counts, it may make sense to reconsider using "^" (a caret, hence the name of this page, CaretNotes).

 

 

Proposal

 

Specific brainstorm proposal:

Use a standalone ^ for one reference in a tweet.

Number them for more than one, i.e. ^1 ^2, and then reverse the order for the end-citations, 1^http://... 2^http://... . E.g. these real world examples could be redone with end-citations: 

 

1. One citation. http://twitter.com/mkapor/status/1449285878 redone:

 

Obama to bank CEO's: I'm the only thing between you and the pitchforks.^ This has to be the line of the week. ^http://bit.ly/18OlTW

 

2. Two citations. http://twitter.com/timoreilly/status/1449710728 redone:

 

Obama to bank CEO's: I'm the only thing between you and the pitchforks^1 This has to be the line of the week.^2. 1^http://bit.ly/18OlTW 2^http://twitter.com/mkapor/status/1449285878

 

(full twitter permalink URL used for demonstration purposes, in practice all URLs would be shortened to better fit Twitter's constraints).

 

 

Background

 

CaretNotes is based on this comment I made on a blog post suggesting * for sources on Twitter:


 

Inventing[1] a syntax for a theoretical need[2] nearly always fails.

 

The "@" convention on Twitter succeeded because:

1. People demonstrated a need to refer to other people - evidence: numerous uses of references to people and usernames in tweets, even early on in Twitter's history.

2. People converged (perhaps re-used from online forums?) the "@" symbol as a way to explicitly reference usernames - well before Twitter took advantage of the emergent behavior by hyperlinking such references and thus explicitly adopting the syntax that the community had organically converged on.

 

Existing Twitter users have already solved the semantic citation problem with inline shortened URLs (e.g. see most of http://twitter.com/timoreilly ).

 

For end-citations/expansions, there is established practice in the web design/development communities (most W3C mailing lists[3], see examples[4]) of using bracketed numbers (as above) in plain text media to provide footnotes which can be used for either explanations, citations, or both.

 

I don't know the origins of the bracket end/foot-note reference, but presumably it's due to limitations of the plain text medium (no superscripts) compared to print, and a desire to not overload traditional means of superscripting in plain text, e.g. the "^" for exponents.  

 

In a constrained medium such as Twitter where every byte counts, it may make sense to reconsider using "^" (a caret, hence the name of this page, CaretNotes) as @jstuker suggests.

 

Specific brainstorm proposal:

  • Use a standalone ^ for one reference in a tweet.
  • Number them for more than one, i.e. ^1 ^2, and then reverse the order for the end-citations, 1^http://... 2^http://... . E.g. these real world examples could be redone with end-citations: 

 

1. One citation. http://twitter.com/mkapor/status/1449285878 redone:

 

Obama to bank CEO's: I'm the only thing between you and the pitchforks.^ This has to be the line of the week. ^http://bit.ly/18OlTW

 

2. Two citations. http://twitter.com/timoreilly/status/1449710728 redone:

 

Obama to bank CEO's: I'm the only thing between you and the pitchforks^1 This has to be the line of the week.^2. 1^http://bit.ly/18OlTW 2^http://twitter.com/mkapor/status/1449285878

 

(full twitter permalink URL used for demonstration purposes, in practice all URLs would be shortened to better fit Twitter's constraints).

 

Tantek

 

[1] I say "inventing" because no real world evidence, e.g. links to actual examples (as opposed to an artificial demonstrative example as in the above post ) on the public web, has been provided.

 

[2] I say "theoretical" because no real world need has been shown for providing end-citations (as opposed to inline-citations) in a medium like Twitter.

 

[3] http://lists.w3.org/

 

[4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2002Sep/0067.html

 


Return to FrontPage

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.