Going for Pingback

Well, there are still the pingbacks to be discussed. I found some nice reading and would like to state them here:

Les Orchard [1] means: I want as much automated and intervention-free invitation to participation in my blog as I can provide. I want manufactured serendipty to operate here while I\’m away or asleep. I want this site to help me discover connections and uncover links, whether by automated agent or by friendly visitor. I want to lower the thresholds to interaction as far as I can. I love it when I\’ve seen a few visitors to my site talk amongst themselves while I was on my drive to work.

While Ian Ernest Hickson says in his whitepaper on \”Pingback vs Trackback\”:

The spec is barely a week old [posted 2002-09-27] and already I\’m seeing pingbacks on sites of people I\’ve never heard of, so implementations are spreading, which is great.

Ian wrote some Pingback-specs [3] with Sil [4], who stated in a comment:

[..] PB was there to avoid show-referrers scripts, for two reasons: the first is that they\’re awkward, especially for people who don\’t have lots of control over their server (say, are using web hosting). The second is that when I know that someone\’s got a show referrers script, after I\’ve made a post pointing to one of theirs, I\’ll click the link therein so that they get a referrer notification, as Phil points out. This shouldn\’t have to happen. PB was a simple way of seeing \”posts that reference this post\”, to climb back *up* a train of links that you can follow downwards.

[1] http://ln.hixie.ch/?start=1033171507&count=1
[2] http://www.decafbad.com/blog/tech/old/ooobie.phtml
[3] http://www.hixie.ch/specs/pingback/pingback
[4] http://www.stupidfool.org/archives/2002/09/000212.shtml

Leave a Reply