Biomedical and Electrical Engineer with interests in information theory, evolution, genetics, abstract mathematics, microbiology, big history, Indieweb, and the entertainment industry including: finance, distribution, representation
Jack, Your response (above on your site) is a good example of watching what is going on and knowing what your site can and can't do.
Because you put your response directly into the comment box on your site (ostensibly in a general sense to the main post rather than to my response), your site didn't send me a webmention for it and so I didn't know you had responded except that I happened to come back to your post. If you visit it, you'll see that your reply doesn't show up on http:/
The better method using Known would have been for you to have clicked the permalink on your site for my comment (the date of my comment or the name of my site) that would have gone to my original, you could then have used the bookmarklet for Known (found at https:/
Because I'm replying to both your post and mine, it should show up via webmention on both. The manual comment box on Known is really only for people whose sites don't support Webmention. Some people actually disable the comment box functionality and only receive Webmentions as a means of preventing spam comments.
In an ideal world, your comment box would send both Webmentions and salmentions to maintain the integrity of the comment thread. Since it doesn't (yet) then you need to do that manually, especially if you want me to see your reply.
Hopefully all this makes some sense...
Here's a photo post of some of the UI that may make it make a bit more sense: http:/
The sound of your original post and the reply are making me think that you're manually opening up your site in a browser, clicking on the "Status Update" piece of the UI, then manually clicking on the "Reply to a site" button, and then manually cutting and pasting the URL in for replies every time. Does this mean you're not using the browser bookmarklet to generate all of your responses?!!
If this is the case, then hie thee to https:/
In some sense this will make your replies only replies, your status updates only updates, and your posts articles that can only mention other articles (unless you manually do what I'd done before). In the initial case I outlined above, you're manually creating statuses which technically get turned into replies by manually adding the reply URL. The difference can be seen in visiting/comparing the URLs http:/
I pray that you've known this all along, you'll forgive my "indiesplain", and that I'm not catching the subtlety of your original post. The Known bookmarklet is 90% of the beauty of the system and drastically cuts back on the manual 'til it hurts portion of the program. And of course if it doesn't make sense, let me know and I'll make a video of the process or we can do a screen share if necessary. I'm addicted to bookmarklets of all kinds, but realize that not everyone uses them the way (or to the extreme) that I do.
If not, I'm not sure I fully understand your original issue or why you'd want to create a new post (with a title) to do replies to others' content, and I'll have to revisit the issue you're having.
@andreweckford I'll wait to see what the "webmaster" posts later. :) Thanks for the live tweeting you're doing, particularly the linked stream. I know you're most of the way through, but next time you might give http:/
It will also save your entire tweet stream from the conference in a simple format so you can cut and paste your work into a blog post quickly after-the-fact for archiving into the conference website (or your own).
It's one of the best conference tools I've come across for this type of thing.
Instruction manual if you need it: https:/
#conferences #twitter #ITBio #noterlive
Manton, after having heard/seen your microcasts (and those of others) as well as your mention of podcasting tools above, I thought I'd point out that there's a micropub tool called Screech for podcasts: https:/
Some of the issue is that WordPress has a huge number of plugins which adds a lot of additional complexity (especially for Micropub clients) which isn't always going to be handled by every client.
As for webmentions, they're being bolted onto WordPress which doesn't have (or allow) a custom comment type, so they're jury-rigged in the best manner possible. There is still ongoing work, especially with the Semantic Linkbacks Plugin which does a lot of the heavy lifting here, if you've got thoughts/ideas, you should certainly weigh in on those Github issues as they are evolving.
I know there were a handful of quirks that have been changed in Known in the past months to fix some issues with microformats that were being parsed incorrectly, and thus caused other platforms like WordPress not to let them display as nicely when received. I think most have been merged and a new release of Known was pushed yesterday and should hopefully clear up some of these issues. I think the developers of the WordPress plugins and even the Known community are very responsive, so feel free to jump in with feedback, suggestions, or even pull requests on any of the pieces which are all on GitHub.
I'm sure there will be some remaining rough edges, but in general a lot of them have been smoothed over in the past year and most improvements now seem to be geared towards making the suite of tools more user friendly or to better extend the functionality.
@Mercy They seem like completely different products to me.
Known is a CMS which allows you to own your data, then publish and syndicate it to multiple platforms (including uploading to Anchor). It doesn't have any audio creation or editing functionality. I have seen people using this and WordPress lately for small personal microcast "channels" which can be subscribed to or syndicated out to other social platforms.
Anchor appears to have some production and publishing tools as well as a distribution platform of sorts. It looks like the material you publish to your own station can be listened to for 24 hours, but then disappears unless you archive it to your account privately. Fortunately you can export your audio with a little bit of gymnastics, but it's not intuitive. This seems more like an ephemeral audio version of snapchat to me.
I'm curious what you're looking for in a minipodcast? I'm considering something shortly myself and have been looking at Anchor as well as Opinion2, Spreaker Studio, audioBoom, tryca.st, and even others as simple as using my LiveScribe Echo pen to record and then distribute via my Known or WordPress sites.
It looks like you may be using the Post Kinds plugin, so you should be able to reply to other sites using that and putting the requisite URL into the interface under "Post Properties" and including your response. The plugin will include the necessary u-in-reply-to microformat class and your webmention plugin will handle sending the response. If you'd like, you can try responding directly to this post at its permalink.
An alternate method is to use the Indieweb Press This bookmarklet for replies (if you're using the Indieweb Plugin) . You can find the bookmarklets at your /wp-admin/tools.php page about halfway down. Then you can click the bookmarklet on the page you'd like to reply to and it will craft a part of the post to send the reply and then you just add what you wanted to say before publishing to send the webmention.
huffduffer and Not Huffduffer http:/
John describes an early experience with Huffduffer and then goes on to describe how he rolled his own version of something similar. While having your own tools is great, it does make it somewhat difficult to do the social sharing portion if you don't build that into the picture. I wish Jeremy Keith had been able to help him out as I'd love to have an idea of what John is regularly listening to and enjoying.
OwnYourSwarm is awesome! #indieweb #FTW I love the fact that one can use the fantastically and cleanly engineered mobile UIs of services like Swarm/Foursquare and Instagram, but still also manage to own all of the related data (including GPS) on one's own website. Tools like OwnYourGram and OwnYourSwarm really show the power and value of micropub for the future of the internet.
OPML link not working · Issue #898 · PressForward/pressforward https:/
## What I tried/expected:
From the page `/wp-admin/admin.php?page=pf-tools` under the `OPML Link` tab, the instructions indicate:
You can share your subscription list as an OPML file by linking people to http:/
## What happened:
Visiting the indicated link throws the following error:
`Warning: Creating default object from empty value in /htdocs/example/wp-content/plugins/pressforward-4.2.2/includes/opml/object.php on line 48
## Additional information:
I've got a handful of feeds, so I should expect something to appear. Is there a setting I'm missing somewhere? I know that there's a setting for the /feedforward RSS functionality/plugin, is there a similar one for OPML that I'm missing?
Running GitHub version 4.2.2, WordPress 4.7.2
I'm not seeing the HTML export on the desktop version of Kindle (from 2015) on my work laptop at the moment, but I'm positive it's hiding somewhere on my desktop machine, which is currently out of commission for some quirky problems. When I get it running, I'll try to document the feature as I don't think I've seen it mentioned anywhere else and it was tremendously easy and helpful.
I hadn't tried Bookcision as I'd stumbled across what I supposed was an easy answer, but there are a few edge cases for non-Amazon books in my collection that might benefit from using it as Amazon doesn't always play well with content that doesn't originate from the "mothership".
A while back, I'd bookmarked http:/
For general file conversion you might appreciate Pandoc: http:/
There are also some in the community who have tools (like Kevin Marks' http:/
Finally, I liked the teleprompter.css hint for marked2, but if you've not come across it, I often read newspaper, magazine articles, and fiction on my mobile using RSVP-related technology (Rapid Serial Visual Presentation) which has been patented (though I'm not so sure it's enforcable) by http:/
Scott, I don't think I'd replied to you for some reason, but I think I'm generally in the same boat as you. While I prefer to have one Swiss Army knife-like tool that can do everything, I know that it just isn't going to happen, or at least it certainly isn't quite there yet. I use Twitter and Facebook for different things (primarily audience based), so I suppose I shouldn't expect to have my own site do exactly everything I want it to.
Part of the problem is that I don't have the skills, the time, or maybe even the patience to make my own site do everything I'd like it to (and if I did maintenance can be a bear), so sometimes picking up pieces of things here and there from other developers or even on other platforms seems to be the result. In some sense that's why I'm using both Known and WordPress simultaneously (along with a few other side projects which don't fit into either of those). WordPress does a lot of what I'd like, but the speed, simplicity, and ease-of-use that Known provides just couldn't be overlooked to give me more of what I wanted. Over time, I do find myself moving more and more under the WordPress banner, but I always hear the siren song of other tools calling, so it may never be under one umbrella.
I also find that using other tools lets me test drive UX, UI, and general functionality to see if it's something worth building, maintaining, or having myself. And even then, I like to do "manual until it hurts" to raise the bar a bit further.
I think the biggest hurdle to wider adoption is simply the fact that there are so many individual plugins and this takes up far more mental space for the user than it should.
So, another option which I'd like to suggest and advocate for is to **bundle all the plugins into one big single plugin** instead of sub-plugins. You could almost sell it as "the part of WordPress core you always wished you had" and now you can with two clicks: download and activate. (That's got to sound good, even to your mom who's still figuring out how to upload her profile picture.)
From the user's standpoint, this wouldn't require much more than some slightly better UI/descriptions. (And I'm more than happy to write them.) This could consist of a single main settings page with on/off toggles for Post Kinds, Syndication Links, Webactions(?), Micropub, Hum, and IndieAuth. A tabbed interface on this same page with tabs primarily for settings/set up and usage description for all of these (except for maybe Webactions?) would complete the cycle.
Most of the sub plugins don't have many (if any) actual settings other than installation/activation right now which is creating the biggest part of the (mostly mental) hurdle for every day users. I think the average WordPress user probably wouldn't know that they had Webmentions, Semantic Linkbacks, or Webmentions for Threaded Comments installed because they "just work", require no configuration, but are far prettier than any of their predecessors. Why make them carry the mental overhead of what they are and what they do aside from a few subtle lines that they exist? In fact, treating them as if they should have been in WordPress core all along may actually make it more likely to happen.
Additionally things like Micropub which would only have an on/off toggle wouldn't be noticed or used by many unless they had interest in alternate posting interfaces. (And based on the popularity and growth in Twitter interfaces/apps a few years ago, I'm surprised WordPress didn't do this, though perhaps it's part of the reason they're adding a more robust API over the past few years?)
It also means having slightly better or more intuitive explanations of what the individual pieces are (mostly Syndication Links and Post Kinds) near their on/off toggles to better explain what is being activated. Much of this can be taken from the current interface or from the WordPress wiki pages, or added on the individual tabs for the settings for these portions.
I would suggest that doing this would not only make it easier on end users who then wouldn't have to spend the mental space and capacity to keep track of what 10 individual plugins are doing (in addition to the space these take up on the plugin admin page and the fact that, once activated, they disappear from the IndieWeb plugin's list of plugins), but that it would actually dramatically increase the uptake of the single big plugin and its functionality and simultaneously the use of the all the sub plugins individually.
I'd argue that bigger plugins like Yoast SEO or something like PressForward have huge numbers of options and settings and could have been done as separate sub-plugins (the way IndieWeb Plugin is now), but that their value proposition is such that it's well worth spending the handful of minutes reading through the interface to know what the options are, what they mean, and using them to their fullest advantage. I think that Indieweb (and the suite of tools offered on WordPress) is at this tipping point in terms of offering must-have functionality for the future web and that having a simpler integrated set up would help to push it over the edge to broader adoption. (Certainly simpler than the old WP-Social, which users have indicated that they thought was far simpler than Indieweb plugin, though Social actually required more set up.) Additionally all of the seemingly dense text in the "getting started" page could be moved into smaller bit-sized chunks relating to individual portions on a tabbed-interface, for example.
I come to this in part after having spent part of the weekend revamping a bit of the IndieWeb.org documentation on getting started with WordPress and setting up Bridgy with WordPress. A lot of the description is "get this plugin, install, and activate" which takes up a big piece of mental space for the user as well--particularly for the Gen2, 3, 4 users who want a plug and play experience. Far better would be to install one plugin and then modify these handful of settings.
If this is done, then the only remaining (small) hurdle is making sure that the underpinning rel-me data input required of the user is done in a more explicit manner, because this seems to be the lynch-pin holding a lot of it together and making it work. As a result, I'd recommend unbundling the reliance on the User Profile page and put all the rel-me URL fields on their own page in the settings interface for such a single plugin (with all important links just underneath them to encourage users to visit, for example, Twitter's edit profile page to include their website URL in either the website field or in the bio field to enable the bi-directional rel-me.)
Finally a "Tools" tab in the settings page could provide pointer links to additional things like the H-Card Widget or the IndieWeb-PressThis bookmarklets.
When all of this is done, it could also be a simple manner of adding another settings tab to the interface to set up Bridgy with one button links from the plugin to the set up pages for each of the main backfeed services there. Bridgy then automatically checks for the webmention endpoint and checks for rel-me to do it's work, so that part is already automated and relatively user friendly too.
The one caveat I can imagine is that making it all into one big plugin potentially means some small added overhead in development with maintaining some of them as stand alone pieces. I'd recommend keeping them as standalone objects as I honestly believe that pieces like webmentions and micropub are so fundamental to the web, that they should be part of WordPress core and maintaining them separately could help speed this along.