|
|
|
07 Aou 2005
Wild MicroContent
In a document (unpublished) by Martin Lindner I read the following (I hope I may quote):
According to another, more phenomenological approach, wild microcontent is much more important. It is already here, and its strength is lying precisely in its uncontrolled rank growth, unconstrained by any pre-defined schematic fields for recording regular microcontent, It is with these wild microcontent future applications will mainly have to deal to become successful.
This is what I tried to say with my lowercase microcontent item in my checklist. I also used to call it flexibility, but I like Wild MicroContent much better. So I keep this term. I also hope that is a bit better understood this way. By the way it is also why I start to dislike the MicroContent typology. I think I am preferring standardisation of some sort on the field level and not on the item level. An Item is mainly defined by the type of fields it contains. Naturally there still might be some ambiguity, but let’s solve that similar to what is happening now with the rel= tags for links.