Since opening this topic I noticed a few other pages/sites that don't work with Diigolet, my most recent example:

http://support.mozilla.com/en-US/kb/Approving+articles+and+edits

Suggested priority for this issue: very low.

Workarounds include:

* view HTML source of page, copy the text within the 'title' tags, if necessary edit the text in an external editor, paste into Diigolet bookmark dialogue

* more simply :) use something other than Diigolet, although that's an annoyance :(

Best,
Graham

Another example,
http://groups.google.com/group/MacFusion-devel/browse_thread/thread/c333c6acf0101019

Another example,
http://specs.openoffice.org/

Another example,
http://gadgets.boingboing.net/2008/12/17/osx-netbook-compatib.html

Another example,
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081218-gates-foundation-to-help-libraries-be-better-free-net-cafes.html

Another example,
http://www.zotero.org/support/dev/start

Postscript:

Another example:
http://code.google.com/p/jqscrapers/

Another example:
http://www.o3spaces.com/

Experimenting with a URL not previously bookmarked by me:

http://code.google.com/p/tesseract-ocr/

[x] Diigolet 3.1b506 in Safari 3.2.1 (5525.27.1): bugged
[√] Diigolet 3.1b506 in Firefox 3.0.5: not bugged

[√] Diigolet 3.1b506 in WebKit-SVN-r39474 (2008-12-26): not bugged :)

All on Mac OS X 10.5.6, Intel.

[ ] Diigolet in Chrome: not tested, should I do so?

[x] Diigolet 3.1b506 in Chrome 1.0.154.36, Windows XP: bugged

= See also =

http://groups.diigo.com/Diigo_HQ/forum/topic/newline-n-characters-in-title-of-diigo-bookmark-9738

I can't easily invite the desired people to the conversation that was opened by Sean so I'll reproduce here something that's relevant to another topic:

> what I bookmark and/or annotate tends to fall into one of three
> categories:
>
> *    past | present | future
>
> - and the things that I have passed on (shared with others
> _without bookmarking for myself_) fall somewhere within 'past'.
>
> I never use those words as categories (i.e., I don't tag or key
> items in those ways) but I do _organise_ myself and my stuff in
> that way.

A variation on the cloud theme might be:

* honeycomb on a time line.

If you have stumbled across this topic (cloud on a time line), you may wonder what honeycombs and clouds have in common.

Probably: nothing in common! However, honey or honeypot or hexagon or hexagons have been mentioned in a few places - 

http://groups.diigo.com/search_topics?group_name=Diigo_HQ&what=honey*
http://groups.diigo.com/search_topics?group_name=Diigo_HQ&what=hexagon*

- and the time line/movie controller approach could be very neat in a Diigo WebSlides -like approach to organisation of bookmark-related _actions_. Over now to http://groups.diigo.com/Diigo_HQ/forum/topic/next-phase-diigo-the-future-7336#19 …

Probably missing from the opening graphic:

* droplets for Diigo messages and/or Diigo conversations

Workaround

1. immediately after the successful sign in to Diigo using a Google ID

2. do not attempt to associate!

3. copy to clipboard your Google OpenID

4. sign out from Diigo

5. use your Diigo ID (or an OpenID _other_ than Google's) to sign in to Diigo

6. https://secure.diigo.com/setting

7. at the foot of the page, add your Google OpenID

8. sign out from Diigo

9. use any OpenID to sign in to Diigo; Google's has become acceptable.

> I can't reproduce the bug with my google account. Could you try it again? We will monitor the log.

1. Safari 3.1.2 (5525.20.1), Mac OS X 10.5.5, on University of Sussex campus AFAIK with transparent caching proxy

2. https://secure.diigo.com/setting

3. removed my Google OpenID from the list of associations

4. signed out from Diigo

5. signed in using Google OpenID

6. associated the two IDs - success :)

----

When I reported, earlier, the bug was consistent - I tried at least twice, maybe three times. I wonder whether any of the following factors were relevant at that time:

* ISP UK Online maybe with transparent caching proxy and probably using OpenDNS
* NAT x2 (ISP -> ADSL -> wired router -> wireless router -> probably WPA -> MacBook Pro
* Diigo 3.1.6.5
* Firefox 3.0.3

Maybe we should suggest to Chrome developer community that key strokes should be assignable to selected items within the bookmarks/favourites bar/menu.

> Chrome developer community … key strokes … assignable to
> selected items within the bookmarks/favourites bar/menu.

Log of discussion: http://echelog.matzon.dk/logs/browse/chromium/1226358000

Thanks Joel and all :)

Using Diigo 3.1.6.5 in Firefox 3.0.3. on Mac OS X 10.5.5: some of what's described in this thread does not work. At least, not consistently. http://www.diigo.com/annotated/fb02a0776bdc692af1adecce1ffe03eb for an annotated view of the thread.

@ soulgrind r: thanks, and hurrah for usability, consistency and joint detective work :)

I rarely change my mouse preferences in Mac OS X 10.5.5 but at a glance I see

* Primary Button
* Secondary Button
* Button 3 (which I have mapped to Spaces)
* Button 4 (which I have not mapped to anything) - that is, squeezing both sides of the Mighty Mouse.

This nebulous 'Button 4' seems to be interpreted as a middle click - at least, if I curse over a hyperlink then squeeze both sides of my mouse, the link opens in a separate tab (Firefox 3.0.3) without losing focus of the current tab.

On Windows, with a mouse with a scroll wheel, I visualise three clicks:

1. left
2. right
3. middle (typically on the scroll wheel).

What, if anything, would be your fourth click (Button 4) on a mouse in Windows?

LOL … the many differences (not just a Mac/Windows thing) make me tend towards "contextual menu" as a commonly understood expression, but in a Firefox view annotations to this page we see that contextual menu behaviour is unpredictable! There's no winning!

Peace, Graham

I only half-answered my own question. http://www.diigo.com/annotated/fb02a0776bdc692af1adecce1ffe03eb

I very much like what Joel describes (if I visualise Joel's UI correctly, it's a good implementation of what I visualised when in another thread I used the word 'floatiness'.)

However, that (power) feature should IMHO be separate from a more basic desire/requirement to simply:

* _either_ bookmark for oneself

* _or_ share with a group

- at the time of bookmarking.

If an either/or approach is acceptable, then - if in doubt at time of bookmarking - I would probably tend to share with a group … then later (at group review time) maybe _add_ (less likely move) to my personal collection a few bookmarks that are of greater interest to me than to the group.

http://groups.diigo.com/Diigo_HQ/forum/topic/items-from-a-private-group-tag-dictionary-revealed-to-the-public-8496 offers an example of how something supposedly private is found to be public, and not easily corrected.

My sense is that there should be:

* an initial focus on the either/or aspect (above)

* before progressing to potentially more complicated research report structures.

(Research-oriented reporting is a very fine goal, but I think that we have a greater need for improvements to earlier steps in the workflow.)

Thanks
Graham

Natetronn Jackson wrote:

> I don't want to have double bookmarks and as it stands now I have
> the same bookmark in the bookmarks section and I also have a
> duplicate in the list or group.

That's in tune with my thinking. Seçkin Anıl Ünlü, would you agree?

> I am not positive but it might actually make 3 if you send it to a
> list and a group and then the default bookmark section too.

It does sometimes seem that way.

Certainly: if annotations to a bookmark are sequential, over a period of time (not broadly coincidental, prior to sharing with a group) then each round of annotations that's shared may generate an e-mail to group members. Most noticeable if the member has opted to receive e-mails immediately.

It's correct, good that the e-mails alert members to new comments; but if not paying great attention to all comments, readers may

* gain an impression that bookmarks are duplicated, triplicated or more.

> a "hide to list/group option" link

Hmm ... notions of private, shared and public are already sometimes blurred! But I think I know what you mean :)

Natetronn Jackson wrote (order changed a little by Graham):

> I want to be able to hide bookmarks from my self.

+1

I like your expressions

* 'dashboard' and 'archive' (both of which are action/workflow-oriented, both positive)

more than

* 'private' or 'hide' (both of which are state-oriented, with potentially negative implications/results); I'll return to the word 'hide' towards the end of this message.

> dashboard.

Dashboard in Diigo is certainly functional, but too cluttered. In some other forum or conversation (I can't find it at the moment) I suggested that if you have to *scroll* to reach *any* part of a dashboard, then the dash -- the rapidity, the ease of use -- is lost. For the dashboard aspect, I have created a new topic with a cross-reference to this topic.

> So kind of like an archive feature,

+1

Nate, your choice of word - archive - reminds me very neatly of (a) another topic and (b) a conversation that's away from this forum.

http://www.diigo.com/annotated/2bd628cb87104260d29e1231c3f48c13 for an annotated view of

> > > cloud on a time line (UI suggestion)

-- I'll add highlights ASAP.

Back to this topic:

> … it should be done when you add a bookmark to a list and or group,
> it should only be visible while viewing that list or group and no
> where else …

+1
to targeting (either/or) at the time of bookmarking.

> I think private, shared and public are ok. They seem to do what they
> are supposed to do.

Diigo features relating to 'private', 'shared' and 'public' do nearly always work in the ways expressed by Diigo :)

However: to viewers who are not Diigo users, perceptions may be blurred. (When anonymous/public users see something that's clearly labelled 'private', alarm bells may start to ring. That's a separate topic.)

Returning briefly to the word 'hide': Diigo aside, I think of how easy it is for people to misunderstand the expression. An infamous example would be, hidden comments in Microsoft Office Word. I could ramble on about this (and about privacy) but I don't want to mess up this topic :)

> Hope that's more clear if it wasn't already,
>
> Nate

I believe it was clear already :) but the extra conversation has helped me to refine some other thoughts.

Many thanks
Graham

A growing number of good ideas in this topic.

There's a not uncommon use case in comment 4 above that leads to problems (disclosure of information that should be private), which *may* by remedied by somehow filtering after an initial action.

However: for my groups of users, a greater priority is for the initial action to _not_ assume co-location and public disclosure of something that's intended for a private group.

(Critically: Diigolet NEVER defaults to private.)

The _group's_ copy of the bookmark is not a concern.

The _person's_ copy of the bookmark can be troublesome.

What we tend to find is that a personal copy is created -- irrespective of whether the person requires the multiplication.

The unintended creation of the personal copy can be complicated, by its publicity.

The risk of unintented publicity is elevated, by the absence of a Diigolet preference to default to private.

Reading this topic now alongside
http://groups.diigo.com/Diigo_HQ/forum/topic/diigo-expressions-share-to-and-add-to-are-debatably-misleading-the-actual-results-are-more-like-duplicate-triplicate-8754 I can see more clearly the duplication that Nate described.

> … Boolean logic into their filtration system and extend the filtration to include lists and not just tags …

It's the mixed meanings/interpretations of the word 'share', and the multiplicity of objects/metadata, that leaves me currently unable to visualise such things

- filtering is a fine idea, I simply can't visualise it without knowing what's to be filtered ;)

Some Diigo-produced graphics might help.

Best,
Graham

> Filtering with 'NOT Research' would give him what he was calling his "real" bookmarks.

What I need is for bookmarks to appear only in the desired place (not be duplicated or otherwise multiplied) - *without* the need for me or anyone else to filter ;)

Expressed another way,

>> don't want these bookmarks interfere

- I do wish to work without the interference

- I don't wish to observe the interference then filter it out ;)

> Bookmarks are not being duplicated

Re http://www.diigo.com/annotated/26b7b230543dc1c52a7910dcd2d6df2b I'll await a definitive comment from Diigo …

Apples and oranges, I use groups more often than lists, other people use lists more often than groups, other people may use lists or groups only rarely, different perspectives, different tests :) and in my test the tag sets _are_ different: http://www.diigo.com/annotated/26b7b230543dc1c52a7910dcd2d6df2b

Peace
Graham

> … actually had check boxes so you can add the new bookmark to any of
> the groups or lists that you have chosen like so in this example … 

Looking good -- thanks. I have cross-referenced from
http://groups.diigo.com/Diigo_HQ/forum/topic/group-tag-dictionary-failing-recommended-tags-have-never-appeared-7108#16 to that image and to this part of this topic.

@ Diigo developers: when you next attend to menus in this area, the other thing (of which Nate's image reminded me) is http://groups.diigo.com/Diigo_HQ/forum/topic/diigolet-share-to-groups-create-a-group-fails-does-nothing-8774

@ Scott:

Thanks for the prototype, I'll revisit this when I have a clearer vision of what's under the hood of Diigo.

@ all visualisers and developers:

UIs should ideally cater for users who have scores of lists and scores of groups.

A temptation might be: basic and advanced modes. Personally, I'm not sure about that. Already, IMHO (too) many modes in Diigo ;)

FWIW I'd prefer a single mode, non-complicated, a UI that allows _with simplicity_ the future possibility of more advanced use.

(If you don't begin with a vision of advanced use, then as you bolt on advanced features, the whole caboodle could become clunky and hideously layered for more advanced users.)

Cheers
Graham

Sean Brady wrote:

> Sorry for the length of this post.

Thank you (all) for the length of your posts!

> On the original point of this thread: I would love to see an option
> to upload a bookmark to only a group (skipping my bookmarks all
> together).

+1

> Ma.gnolia did this and it was well received. I do occasionally come
> across things that I would add to a group, but not really to my
> Bookmarks.

I surprise myself by more often adding to groups, and my trend is likely to increase.

> the ability to add something to a list and not My Bookmarks makes no
> sense to me at all.

I'll continue to think (long and quietly) about that.
http://www.diigo.com/annotated/64d80c8411d2d50860cf2438106776bf is an itch that I must scratch, and whilst I'd selfishly love the feature (the looping of WebSlides) to be introduced soon, group approaches to best use thereof can wait. Can evolve.

> I cannot personally see an issue where I would have a private group
> where bookmarks going into the group would need to be private as
> well.

To clarify (just one point) (from my own POV):

* with Diigo as is, my group members often _require_ privacy at time of bookmarking

* with a future Diigo as ~we wish it to be, the privacy of a group and the non-multiplicity of the bookmark should suffice.

In other words, I agree. At least, I think I do. LOL.

> Hope it makes some sense.

Between us all, we're getting there!

> In summary, I am +1 to add only to a group and +1 for Boolean tags.

I'm deferring my own thoughts about Boolean logic. Not because I disagree with any of it, simply because my brain is turning to blancmange and Some Things Must Wait.

Yes, that's it. I'll update my profile photo with a plate of blancmange.

Best,
Graham

http://www.diigo.com/tools/api as my first point of reference:

API for bookmarks
- exists.

API for groups
- awaited.

API for lists
- awaited.

Now I'm paraphrasing the statements offered by Diigo ;) but the principle that I allow to guide me is this: whether the APIs are existing, versioned, coming soon, or unscheduled, they are clearly subject to:

* change
* development
* possible deprecation

and so (to avoid disappointment, at least for myself) I'm setting no perceptions in stone.

Parallel to the six-person discussion in this one topic, Diigo have the multi-focus multi-group brainstorms that they recently initiated and I'm happy for that side of things to take priority :) whilst our thoughts tick over...

We're way off-topic :) but here goes ... and please, read to the end of this message before clicking anything (if my message gets across, the urge to click should pass):

> a spring cleaning of sorts

If you're in a mood to spring clean your own collection:
http://www.diigo.com/tag/no_tag | Mine | Last
or
Diigo | Home | My Bookmarks | Untagged | Last

http://groups.diigo.com/Diigo_HQ/bookmark/tag/no_tag
might be group spring cleaning, if any member is inclined. However: I don't encourage this exercise! The presence/absence of tags (without apology, I can't be bothered to tag) does not signify quality/inferority of content.

Of far greater use to me:
http://www.diigo.com/tag/no_tag | Mine | Annotated
then change the tail of the URL
from 1
to 0

The result is nearly, not perfectly, items that lack annotation.

What's going on here?

Simple. I have spent too much time over-focusing on aspects of Diigo that require improvement. Too much time theorising.

I have spent WAY too little time appreciating the existing features of Diigo, experimenting and having fun.

As a child: I dismantled toys and electrical equipment, poked knitting needles in wall sockets. I lived to tell the tale (but at times, my poor mother's nerves were tattered).

Now: I change a 1 to a zero. I discover hidden potential in Diigo (and my mother's nerves are spared :).

> If … not to any … and later I choose to go through them … and add …
> some new … then in the future when I need … some more organizing …
> go back through all of these same … again?

> … do not always have … ready to go for each … aprox. 25% … time …
> unlisted or ungrouped until … back to … organization. Sometimes …
> unread … sometimes … not.

> is there another way that I am not thinking of?

Another way: don't bother!

Seriously, don't over-focus on lists and groups.

My motto is: I will not waste time organising a personal organiser.

(iPhones are great, but life is absolutely fine without one.)

There are literally thousands of online/offline utilities and services that allow us to organise:

* to create lists
* to group things
* to communicate as one-to-many
* to communicate many-to-many.

The beauty, the distinction of Diigo is:

* highlighting
* sticky notes
* comments.

To me: the value -- and it's GREAT value -- arises from the words that people write.

If we're not writing the words ourselves (sticky notes and comments), we're highlighting the words of others that have most meaning to us.

It's like: the semantic web, but better.

In the ongoing quest for a semantic web: experts develop XML, argue, theorise, and weave such things into infrastructures. (We're getting there, but slowly. Definitely a separate topic.)

Here in Diigo: we get a semantic web for free, and it's we humans with social skills and thought processes that add or highlight the meanings of things.

Blah, blah, blah!

Happy thanksgiving!

(Is it still thanksgiving? I wouldn't know. Don't have a personal organiser ;)

Incidentally, I'm not stressing about my 100+ items that lack tags and annotations.

When I use the main Diigo search box to find something, it's found. Cheers, Diigo!

>> Private/Public Unread Bookmarks for Research

That's the topic, and interpretations differ :)

> segregating bookmarks to better organize them

Focusing on the opening comment 1 alone: I sensed myself as being in a situation very similar to Seçkin Anıl Ünlü, finding issues with bookmarking in group environments (without reference to Diigo lists), personally I never think of segregating bookmarks.

> Let us let others define their own methods

I wasn't aware that I had disallowed any definition.

I did express happiness at our thoughts continuing to tick over.

Please don't misunderstand me :)

> You have no use for tags, lists or groups

(I do use tags, lists and groups … a misunderstanding, cleared up :)