Technology As Innovator

I hereby model a message delivery as an article. If a conversation/talk/speech were an article, how differently would people communicate?

The sample article

Let’s take a random article as an example.

The Heading-only style

The communication from this style only conveys the headings of the article. The communicator possibly either doesn’t want to spend more time explaining in details or expects the audience to understand upon hearing the titles.

Advantages

• Time-saving

Disadvantages

• Huh? What next?

The Wiki style

Lambrusco

Some of you may have heard me preach of lambrusco, the foaming, almost purple sparkling wine from the Emilia-Romagna region of Italy.

No, not the semi-sweet fizzy stuff that was so popular in the 1970s, but the real, dry, earthy lambrusco, from producers like Medici Ermete, Vini, Vittorio Graziano and Villa di Carlo. Served icy cold, it’s wonderful with just about any simple dish, be it fried chicken or pizza or burgers.

But you say you want a real wine (as if lambrusco weren’t real enough)? You say you want an American wine because it is, after all, practically the Fourth of July?

Description

This style is exactly like a wiki page. The communicator mentions keywords of the article, with or without priority order. Each of the keyword then links to a whole concept from other sources.

For example, when the speaker mentions “organizational behavior”, s/he could point to a book on the topic and recommend her/his audience to read the book.

Advantages

• Inter-connections of information
• From the spoken conversation, the receivers can then search for the more details with the keywords from the message

Disadvantages

• Some audience who have not known the concepts might lose track of the information mid-way

The Ad-hoc style

The communicator randomly picks paragraphs from the article and give full details of the paragraphs without or with limited conclusion.

Next time: full details of another random paragraph.

Advantages

• The audience might extract the right information in details if asking the right question.

Disadvantages

• Very hard to assemble the comprehensive but scattered information into a complete article.

The Bottom-up style

Throw the conclusion on first, then explain if questioned.

Advantages

• Just straight to the point. Exceeding time doesn’t impact much as the audience has already caught (if so) what they need.

Disadvantages

• Surprise for unprepared audience

The Full-article style

Section by section, paragraph by paragraph, word by word till the end.

Advantages

• Every full details

Disadvantages

• Time consumption

Conclusion

What is your style?

What other styles do you add to this list?

What style do you choose for which situation?

Reference

The sample article is taken from The New York Times’ Reds on Ice? It’s Not Heresy

1. What is Tag

1.1. Definition

A tag is a relevant keyword associated with a piece of information, thus describing the item and enabling keyword-based classification of information.

The piece of information can be files, web pages, images, bookmarks, or blog entries.

Typically, one item contains multiple tags.

Usually a tag contains a link to display all items associated with that tag.

1.2. Tagcloud

A tag cloud is a visual depiction of a collection of tags used on a collections of items. Often, more frequently used tags are more emphasized.

Display order of tag cloud can either be alphabetical, or sorted by popularity, or random.

A tag is frequently found on websites, but there is one good example of printed media that employs tag cloud: The Van Couversun, Wednesday January 3, 2007

1.3. Tag Folksonomy

A folksonomy describes a content that employs tags. Examples of folksonomy may include: del.icio.us, Flickr, MySpace, youtube…

Alternatively, folksonomy also describes a community using a service and navigating through information by following tags and giving tags to own data to help people find them.

Some services (Xanga, Wordpress) provide site-wide tag list while others (Blogger, Yahoo! 360) only give tag list of one owner.

Folksonomy is coined by 2 words ‘folks’ and ‘taxonomy’. ‘Taxonomy’ is from the Greek ‘taxis’ and ‘nomos’ which respectively mean ‘classify’ and ‘manage’. Folksonomy can be interpreted as ‘community classification management’.

2. What are Tags used for?

2.1. Searching

Tagging allows searching. Internet users can follow the link from a tag to retrieve all information associated to that tag.

2.2. Tag vs. Category

Categories allow classification. Tags also allow classification. How are they different?

For example, you write an article about:

“web design for web 2.0, exploiting glossy design style, with images created by Adobe Photoshop”

that article can be put under 2 categories: ‘Design’, ‘Photoshop’. Because these may be the mainstream of your website. The article can be assigned with tags like: ‘web-2.0′, ‘glossy’, ‘images’, ‘Adobe’, ‘web’, ‘web-design’, ‘Design’, ‘Photoshop’

• Categories are more structurized and static | Tags are more liberal and continually added
• Categories can have unique names | Tags need to be popular and used by many
• Categories can have long names | Tags should have less than 3 words
• Posts are usually in one to four categories | A single post can list many more tags (one Flickr photo is allow to contain 70 tags)
• Categories are not tags | Tags can be used to replace categories
• Categories define the mainstream of the website | Tags define the information in each item
• Categories help visitors to get an idea what the website is about | Tags help visitors to find different items

2.3. Drawback

Inconsistency among authors

• Different people may use different terms to identify one object.
  Example: some use ‘football’ and some use ’soccer’ to refer to one kind of sport. ‘lumber’ and ‘timber’ is another example
• Plural and singular
  Example: ‘dog’ and ‘dogs’ are two different tags
• Polysemy - words which have many meanings
  Example: ‘table’ can be a thing in the dining room or on the computer screen
• Synonyms
  Example: television and TV

Inconsistency among items of one author

• One person, at different times may give different tags to one object. For example, Bob wrote about a TV show and tagged it ‘television’. The day after, he wrote about another one and tagged it ‘tv’. Yet another day, he tagged his next post ‘TV show’.
• Unpredictability: when one adds a new tag, she may discover that many previous posts may also be associated with that tag. Editing back can be a pain.

3. Giving smart Tags

3.1. Giving smart tags can do 3 things

1. Boost visitors’ navigation: with commonly found tags, visitors save time to find the information they expect
2. Push your wiki(search_engine) pagerank: when your tags match what internet users type in their wiki(search_engine), the possibility that your page appears on top results is higher
3. Save time for regressive tag addition: when you predict a collection of tags you’re going to use, it will save time for you to add tags to previously posted entries

3.2. How to give smart tags

…or more accurately, find smart tags to give

1. Compare the tags you’re planning to use to see which is more popular. This can be done by searching each keyword with Google to record the number of results returned. More efficiently, there are utilities that enable this: Go Rank
2. Study how people tag by visiting popular tagging folksonomy

   

   • del.icio.us
   • Flickr
   • wordpress
   • Xanga Tags
   • Technorati

4. The ‘other’ Tags

Tag cloud inspiration

Ideas are expressed based on the presentation of a tag cloud depiction

Mind Map

Fun Web 2.0 Logo Cloud

• 

The outdoor tag game

Tag is a playground game that usually involves two or more players attempting to “tag” other players by touching them with their hands. It may be made more complex with various rule modifications.

The self-writing tag game

Anyone who is tagged by a friend is to write a number of truths about her/himself, then continue to tag other friends.

The secret tag game

Anyone who is tagged needs to tag three other friends before s/he can read the “secret message” left by the tagger.

Read more here

Reference

Lorelle on Wordpress