Comments on: Zapd – Opportunity or Threat? http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/2011/04/15/zapd-opportunity-or-threat/ Reflections on the Web and Web 2.0 Tue, 21 May 2013 01:42:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Christopher Gutteridge http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/2011/04/15/zapd-opportunity-or-threat/#comment-91415 Tue, 19 Apr 2011 08:13:22 +0000 http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/?p=7146#comment-91415 Well, that was quick and positive.

]]> By: Nicole Harris http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/2011/04/15/zapd-opportunity-or-threat/#comment-91411 Mon, 18 Apr 2011 22:22:52 +0000 http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/?p=7146#comment-91411 Interestingly I had cause to comment on Zapd from an identity perspective recently too :-) http://access.jiscinvolve.org/wp/eggs-and-baskets/.

]]> By: Kristoph Cichocki-Romanov http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/2011/04/15/zapd-opportunity-or-threat/#comment-91394 Fri, 15 Apr 2011 21:17:44 +0000 http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/?p=7146#comment-91394 Hi Christopher,

Your totally correct. It was an oversight on our part and will be fixed in a build we’ll be releasing on Monday. Thank you for the heads up.

Regards,

Kristoph Cichocki-Romanov
Founder & CTO
Zapd.com

]]> By: Brian Kelly (UK Web Focus) http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/2011/04/15/zapd-opportunity-or-threat/#comment-91384 Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:49:26 +0000 http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/?p=7146#comment-91384 Surely unsurprising – this blog has been around for over four years, is updated regularly, is registered with Google and has losts of links to it whilst my Zapd site was only created yesterday. In addition surely being unavailable from Google is an advantage for a disposable Web site – a feature not a bug?

]]> By: Phil Bradley http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/2011/04/15/zapd-opportunity-or-threat/#comment-91382 Fri, 15 Apr 2011 09:49:04 +0000 http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/?p=7146#comment-91382 Interesting stuff Brian, I’ll have to take a look at it. I wonder how it’ll scale onto the iPad. To move your discussion on a little, I really wouldn’t care if what I created was defined as a website, a webpage or anything else. If it contained the data that I wanted, and other people could see it, that’s good enough for me.

I presume that when you ask ‘should such web sites be allowed to be created?’ you’re talking solely from the perspective of an institution. The institution may well have its own rules on this, irrespective of the tools used to create the resource, and I would assume that a tool like Zapd would be in the same category as a start page or a wiki. The interesting question for me is much more around the institutional policy – if staff find these things useful, why would an institution want to stop them creating such sites/pages? What are their concerns, and surely those underlying concerns are the thing that needs to be addressed, not the use of individual tools.

Presuming you read a particular newspaper a week ago, could you tell me what was in it? Probably not, and that’s fine. Simply because something is easy and quick to do doesn’t mean that its value isn’t high. I use lots of things very heavily for a very short period of time, and may never go back to them again. It seems a very odd statement for the person who asked the question to make. I think your response there is absolutely spot on.

Thanks for the headsup on this.

]]> By: Frank Norman http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/2011/04/15/zapd-opportunity-or-threat/#comment-91381 Fri, 15 Apr 2011 09:47:41 +0000 http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/?p=7146#comment-91381 I like the idea of disposable websites. It’s just another way of conmunicating and sharing stuff.

Stuff has a very broad range. Branded institutional websites are appropriate for prospectuses and corporate messages, but OTT for short-lived conversations.

]]> By: Les Carr http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/2011/04/15/zapd-opportunity-or-threat/#comment-91380 Fri, 15 Apr 2011 09:16:02 +0000 http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/?p=7146#comment-91380 A day later and your zapd site still hasn’t shown up on Google, while this post already has.

]]> By: Christopher Gutteridge http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/2011/04/15/zapd-opportunity-or-threat/#comment-91379 Fri, 15 Apr 2011 09:09:14 +0000 http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/?p=7146#comment-91379 Interesting that the .png images do not have the correct mimetype;

localhost:~ cjg$ curl  'http://1a5c.zapd.co/pictures/4da6c1882192c97e00000003.png?width=300' -I
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 09:05:31 GMT
Status: 200 OK
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary
Content-Type: application/octet-stream
Cache-Control: private
X-UA-Compatible: IE=Edge,chrome=1
X-Runtime: 0.182463

The *know* it’s a PNG because they are scaling it. The reason I was even looking is that when you said a new domain for every resource I assumed that meant even each image.

I’ve never done it, but it is possible to make a websever treat the domain as just another parameter in serving the request, and the tinyurl-like URLs don’t need to be placed in the DNS you just do something cunning so that *.zapd.co directs to your web server (or cluster).

The catch is that people do care about URLs, but maybe not for minor ‘disposable’ sites, but I just had to alias users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/cjg/ to also work from http://www.users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/cjg/ because we are not allowed to put http:// on our business cards (!!! branding gone mad, I tell you!) and so it’s useful to allow www. at the start to give a cue that it’s a web address.

]]>