We’re changing the name of our Firefox extension and we’d like to solicit your help in return for the opportunity to feel good and win an iPod Touch at the same time.

The current working name is ‘Search Thresher’ which I’m sure you’ll agree, is too much of a mouthful.

In order for you to win, your nomination must be used in full. Even if we decide to use your nomination in part, you won’t win. This is mainly because we’ve already thought of lots of names using terms you’re likely to think of, but perhaps in a different combination. If you come up with a name that we’ve already thought of and we decide to go with it, then obviously you’ll win.

So, we need to ensure this little competition is transparent and in no way, open to interpretation. This is especially important because bloggers are a sceptical lot and I’m certain some of you already think that this is rigged in some way

How to enter

Either drop us a comment on this post, or write a blog post of your own. If you decide to write your own post, please ensure to use a trackback so we get to see it. That’s it.

Closing date

25th January 2008 – so get moving.

Some background to help you out

Today, search engines provide the title and description of Web sites in search results, with prominence given to the highest bidder, not the most relevant or most trusted. Wouldn’t it be useful to know, which Web sites conform to industry standards and best practices without having to visit each site to find out? Wouldn’t you sometimes like to know which Web sites are accessible, child friendly, mobile friendly, endorsed by a qualified medical authority, or follow best practices for privacy and copyright?

Millions of Web site owners already demonstrate their conformance and commitment to standards and best practices by displaying a Trustmark on their Web site. However, search engines don’t provide this valuable information in search results.

Consumers have come to expect content labels on the back of products in the supermarket, as they provide information about the suitability of their contents. Sometimes the labels are relevant and sometimes they’re not, but everyone at some point uses them. Some people use them all of the time.

Segala is helping to bring the same concept to the Web using a new method of classifying and labelling content. Funnily enough, the method is called Content Labels.

A Content Label is a file that contains Metadata on steroids. It’s this Metadata that search engines and browsers can now use to provide more meaningful information in search results.

So, now about the Firefox extension

Segala owns a Firefox extension that reads Content Labels and does exactly what I’ve explained above. The screen shot below should give you an idea for how it annotates Google to highlight Web sites that have a Content Label. In short, red x means there is no additional information. An amber tick means the Web site owner is making a claim about their own Web site. A green tick means a trusted third party has independently verified the Web site owner’s claim.

There’s plenty more that the extension can and will do as we launch monthly builds from next month, but that should be enough information to get you thinking about a new name.

The extension is being endorsed by the W3C and is one of four applications used by the W3C Semantic Web Education and Outreach Special (SWEO) Interest group, to help demonstrate a real implementation of the Semantic Web.

Hint

Here are some keywords to consider: Trust, Security, Reliable, Relevant, Suitable, Appropriate, Semantic Web, Better Discovery.

Keywords you should not consider: censorship and filter.

Ideally the name will contain one word and a maximum of two.

You can make as many suggestions as you like. So, get going and suggest some names now. Good luck and thanks for helping out

Check out the early-stage concept browser and have a play.

Share it

Earlier this evening I came across a post on TechCrunch about data privacy, in which garlick got a mention. I was delighted to see that Mike decided not to use the term ‘identity’ in the title.

I was on one of the Essential Web panels during the summer. Although companies such as Jaiku gave a pitch to my panel (it’s hardly surprising that it was bought given that Google’s Head of Acquisition was on a panel after me). I was disappointed not to have been given the opportunity to quiz garlik and its hijacking of the term identity during its pitch. When I say hijacking, I mean, they pitched their company as a means of resolving the issue of identity online. I have a problem with their pitch because they’re confusing people with their use of terminology. I’ll expand on this in a separate post if asked to do so specifically.

On the plus side for the UK, it is one of the most advanced countries in the world when it comes to helping protect minors from inappropriate content online.

The Internet Trust Watch Foundation (IWF) in the UK, is one of the most impressive if not the most impressive organisation within the entire membership of inhope. In short, the IWF share a list of IP addresses that belong to Web sites which provide illegal content such as child pornography. I’m pretty sure that any decent human being will find it difficult to argue that child pornography isn’t worng and illegal.

A friend of mine once debated with me that blacklisting any type of IP addresses, irrespective of what they’re used for, is wrong as it infringes ‘freedom of speech’. Ok. so he has a point. But, shouldn’t our moral obligation to protect children from harm come first?

Inhope

INHOPE is the International Association of Internet Hotlines and was founded in 1999 under the EC Safer Internet Action Plan.

When a user tries to visit a Web site which has been banned by the ISP, they’ll simply receive a 404 error message, or something similar.

Whilst I’m on the subject, I might as well point out that Ireland is probably one of the worst countries within the inhope membership. Ireland doesn’t share known IP address of illegal Web sites amongst all its members (ISPs etc.). If memory serves me right, the CEO of the UK’s IWF told me that its Irish counterpart is more interested in data protection, or some other scruffy form of do-gooder legislation that does more harm than good.

Reading back, I’ve noticed that this post covers a jolly mixture of things. As I’ve said, I’ll write a more detailed post about censorship later this week.

Share it

Visit the O2 Web site to see an example of our Trustmark. Clicking on the Trustmark invokes the Compliance Certificate. This is currently being redesigned also.

We’ve created a few varients to support different Web sites but we sometimes design one for specific brands when they feel the current selection detracts from their brand.

We’re now providing our Partners with the opportunity to promote themselves as a Segala Certified Partner using a logo for their own Web site.

Share it

Next on the agenda is a vocabulary for the mobile web best practices and blogs.

If there is a code of conduct YOU would like seen turned into a content label vocabulary then drop me a message on http://contentlabel.org/ and we’ll try and cook one up

Share it

Getting other trust providers to adopt Content Labels sooner rather than later will help build the ecosystem more quickly. It will then become more compelling for mainstream browsers and search engines to read this extra Metadata.

Why should you have to visit each Web site to see if they have a trustmark of some kind? You should be able to specify in your preferences; ‘show me Web sites that are qualified by a medical authority’, ‘show me Web sites that allow me to reuse content under creative commons’ and ‘show me Web sites that enable text resizing’.

Furthermore, we’re going to announce new price points which will shock even our partners. This will help get more Web sites certified and more importantly, labelled.

If you haven’t seen the power of Content Labels yet, why not download our Firefox extension to see how the future of search is likely to look like. If you install the extension, please note that it’s a pre-alpha build. You will also need to search for specific terms such as ICRA, Segala and E-consultancy. There are plenty more terms that will bring up labelled sites but that’s enough to get you going.

This is an exciting time inside Segala as we’re about to see our hard work over the past few years pay off by launching a *true* Semantic application that makes a real difference to end users, by enabling more trust, relevance and reliability in search.

If you’d like to help us seed interest, please get in touch and we’ll give you show and tell before making a formal announcement.

Visit our Web site where you can find out more about our Firefox extension.

Share it

Glaxstar is a company run by a very good friend of mine, Ian Hayward. These guys have built what I believe to be the only 100% full proof way of protecting minors from inappropriate content on the Web. Their newly released product is called Glubble. I’ve known about this for a very long time but have been unable to blog about it.

These are the same guys behind Mozzilla’s bluechip extensions for companies such as Google, Yahoo! PayPal and more recently, eBay.

They’re also responsible for building Segala’s (Semantic) Firefox extension to enable more trust on the Web by reading Content Labels. Ian has asked me enough times for a roadmap of functionality changes so I better get on with it!

Actually, come to think of it, Glaxstar’s Firefox extension built to our requirements to read Content Labels is equally compelling as it adds more trust on the Web based on standards and codes of conduct.

You can read TechCrunch’s review here.

Check it out, it’s fantastic!!! http://glubble.com

Share it

Here’s another go at explaining what Content Labels are. I’ll start by explaining what problem is being solved and then talk about how to accelerate the process of getting mass adoption by building an ecosystem.

Steve Clayton, Microsoft UK Partnerships CTO sums up what we’re doing quite nicely on Facebook.

Had a great chat with Paul Walsh this morning – he has some cool shit going on with Segala that need to be more widely seen!

What problem are we solving?

When conducting a search on the Web, search engines such as Google only display the title and description of Web sites. They do this by displaying the title as a hyperlink, followed by the description of the site. Search engines don’t provide information about the suitability of content to individuals.

What type of information about the suitability of content are users likely to demand in the future?

1. Parents will want to know which Web sites are appropriate/inappropriate for their children in their particular country
2. Disabled users will want to know which sites comply with specific W3C Web accessibility guidelines, to enable them browse the Web in comfort. This is now a legal requirement in countries such as the UK, US, Canada and Australia
3. Some users will want to know which sites have been independently verified by a medical authority so they can trust information which helps them make important decisions
4. Users (e.g. bloggers and journalists) may wish to know which sites permit them to reuse content such as copy, images and video
5. Consumers may wish to only buy from Web sites with privacy statements or follow a code of conduct for e-commerce.

Content Labels enable all of the above

1. Based on the Semantic Web, a Content Label is a file that contains metadata
2. Web site owners use Content Labels to promote their conformance and/or commitment to industry standards and codes of conduct
3. Content Labels are more flexible than any other solution. It is possible to make assertions about an entire Web site or specific Web pages. That is, pages abc are child friendly but the rest of the sites isn’t and the entire site is accessible apart from pages xyz. SSL and current identity certificates don’t support this level of flexibility
4. Search engines and browsers read Content Labels in order to provide more information about the suitabilty of content.

Reasons why mass adoption should be seamless

1. Content Labels (POWDER) will soon become a ratified W3C standard (hopefully by September 2007)
2. Content Labels is going to be proposed as a replacement for PICS; the outdated solution adopted by Internet Explorer today
3. Current implementations of trust use proprietary technology, prohibiting scalability across the entire Web. Why? Well, because unless Web site owners implement their solution and users download/use their plug-in or client software, you won’t be able to see which Web sites should be trusted from search results. In my opinion, they all act like vertical entities without due consideration for each other to help get mass adopt for trust across the Web. Implementers include Netscape Navigator, VeriSign, McAfee SiteAdvisor and GeoTrust etc.
4. The W3C Mobile Web Initiative trustmark (mobileOK) will come in the form of a Content Label. This demonstrates that the W3C see the benefit in using Content Labels for making conformance claims to standards
5. Segala’s Semantic Firefox extension reads Content Labels and alters Google search results. It can even filter out sponsored links. Our extension is being endorsed and promoted by the W3C Semantic Web Education and Outreach (SWEO) Special Interest Group.

Segala is helping to build the ecosystem

1. Segala recently launched a global partner programme to audit and certify Web sites for Web accessibility standards compliance (soon mobileOK amongst other standards in the future)
2. Partners have already started to certify and label Web sites such as Tesco Personal Finance and St. Paul’s, demonstrating scalability at opposite ends of the tail
3. Segala is certifying technology and product providers as ‘Accessibility-ready’. That is, tools that build Web sites which are automatically compliant with specific accessibility guidelines
4. Segala has created ContentLabel.org to provide an independent framework that enables new industry best practices and codes of conduct to be created by anyone, any association or any government agency in any country. Anyone can create a new code by using the inbuilt wiki
5. Segala is almost finished the build of a system that will be white labeled for other trust(mark) providers, including the aforementioned above. Our technology can also be used by new trust providers that want to launch new standards and codes of conduct anywhere in the world
6. Segala is helping mainstream browsers and search engines to better understand ‘how’ to make the simple changes required. We are doing this by providing the Firefox extension and soon, Internet Explorer plugin.

We are delighted to partner with Segala as we believe the Segala Trustmark provides excellent, highly credible recognition based on stringent best practice for accessibility. I am confident that our clients who attain the Trustmark certification will benefit from it.

- Emma Kirk, Strategic Director

How to get your Web site certified and labelled

Contact Segala to have your Web site audit and certified. We will also provide the Content Label to ensure your Web site is highlighted in future search results.

How you can certify and label your clients’ Web sites

Join the Seagla-certified partner programme and we will provide you with all the required tools that will enable you to sell and provide Web accessibility services.

Check out what current partners have to say.

Share it

I still don’t like listening to myself as I find all the faults of slipping up on the ‘odd’ mispronunciation and of course, repetition, which I’m particularly good at. We covered quite a lot of (different) ground so Paul has split the interview into 3 episodes;

1. About Segala
2. About Content Labels and how they will improve search by enabling trust on the Web
3. Best practice guidelines for blogs, the positive spin

The third episode has not yet been published on Chilibean. I’ll post it as soon as it’s released (scheduled for next week).

You can also find a useful explanation about Content Labels in a previously written blog post.

Enjoy!

Share it

ICANN

ICANN has voted against the introduction of a new domain called .xxx which would have given the adult industry its own domain. The so-called independent body cited a list of reasons why the application was rejected. However, they didn’t cite ‘how’ it failed to meet their requirements. The application has now been put forward and rejected 3 times.

The idea behind the .xxx domain was simple. Each registered Web site using .xxx would use a Content Label to enable browsers and search engines identify adult orientated content. This would help parents protect their children from potentially harmful content by selecting preferences to exclude all .xxx Web sites from search results.

The application received widespread support from those who know more than anyone, how to protect children from inappropriate content and those of us who specialise in content classification to enable more reliable and relevant search for the future.

On March 30th 2007 I received an email from Stephen Balkam, CEO of the Family Online Safety Institute (FOSI, formally known as ICRA) informing me of the bad news. FOSI’s board represents brands such as AOL, Microsoft, AT&T, BT, Cisco, GSM Association and others. Due to project work, I haven’t been able to write about Segala’s position until now.

In order to declare our relationship, Segala has a licence agreement with FOSI for the provision of Segala-verified services to Web sites that carry an ICRA label. This helps users to differentiate between self-labelled and independently verified Web sites.

A recent news release put out by FOSI includes

We are disappointed by ICANN’s decision not to approve the .xxx domain.
We believe it has missed a great opportunity to increase the use of content labels and thus make filtering and other child protection efforts more effective.

We also regret that the voluntary funding of the International Foundation for Online Responsibility from the .xxx registrations will not now become a reality. Contrary to the ICANN resolution, which erroneously asserts that the .xxx proposal avoids the protection of vulnerable members of the community, the proposal was actually an important self-regulatory effort in the field of online safety, and passing it up only hurts parents and children.

- Stephen Balkam, CEO of FOSI.

I think ICANN has not only demonstrated its lack of understanding in how to protect children online, it has also demonstrated that it is not independent and free of political agendas. It has fallen foul to religious commentators who have the ear of one or two seats in the White House. In my opinion, ICANN should not reside in the US, it should reside with the United Nations, which is completely independent.

What is the answer?

Well, current filtering methods are certainly not the answer as they are extremely limited and mostly ineffective. For example, Internet Explorer uses a very old W3C recommendation called PICS (Platform for Internet Content Selection). To the end user, this is called site advisor and can be found in the options section of the browser’s preferences.

Segala amongst others such as FOIS, Vodafone, T-Mobile and others, feel that Content Labels is much more appropriate. Content Labels is currently going through a W3C Full Recommendation Track to ratify the method as *the* standard for content classification and labelling. Content Labels is also being proposed as a replacement for PICS.

You can read what Jemima Kiss’ has to say on her blog at the Guardian.

Share it

I’m writing this post in direct response to a post written by Damien Mulley, columnist for the Sunday Tribune in Ireland. Damien is well respected within the Irish blogsphere and is responsible for creating the Irish blog awards. Ok, so it’s a small country with a few people when compared to the countries that most of our readers live in, but his view (and those who commentate on his blog) is undoubtedly valuable to this debate.

Damien entitled his post Blogger code of conduct? Two words – F*ck off. Note that I replaced the u.

So, I think we can gather from Damien’s post that he doesn’t like the idea of a code for blogs. However, I’m hoping this view is tainted by a misconception so we can have an informed debate, rather than slamming the door on his way out of the room. I also feel that many of the commentators on his blog now have a tainted view based on his own opinion, which I believe, is misinformed.

Damien wrote

When I see companies starting up codes of conduct I think ISO certification, I think of these astroturfing “plan english” campaigns which charge organisations A LOT to write better documents. What happened to Kathy Sierra was horrible but this hysteria does nobody any good and it is sickening to see business people pitch their products at such a moment.

I don’t wish to make any assumptions as Damien hasn’t named any companies. However, I’ll state Segala’s position for the record.

I came up with the idea for a code of conduct (as I’m sure many others did) for blogs a couple of years ago. This was mainly because I saw the potential for mainstream commentators to pretend to be someone they’re not, with the aim of positively or negatively commenting on brands that they either owned, or were in competition with. In doing this, they could have a huge impact on consumer opinion and therefore make an impact on a company’s bottom line. In fact, a PR company was caught doing this recently.

Damien went onto say

Follow netiquette, follow good manners, be civil, or don’t. I really hope that something like this doesn’t spawn some elitist bully-boy standards or code body that does nothing more than charge an admin fee and bully people into signing up. That’s what unions are for. Freedom of speech should not be cut back on because of a few assholes. Why on earth do we need to impose guidelines on ourselves online when we don’t need to offline? A blogging community won’t tolerate people like those that attacked Kathy and will de-link from them and will just shun them and then don’t need a checklist to do so.

Unless Damien is referring to a specific code that I haven’t seen, I think he’s blowing this whole idea way out of proportion. I agree with everything he says about bully-boy standards etc. However, who said that someone, or more importantly, some government was going to impose anything on anyone. I don’t believe for a second a code for blogs could possibly become an ISO standard, nor would I like it to be. I just happen to be a qualified ISO auditor so I have the experience (and qualification) to know that it’s not applicable, relevant, warranted or wanted. Perish the thought even!

What I (Segala) intend to do is facilitate debate, formalise codes and then endorse/promote them through ContentLabel.org. It’s not for us to say what is appropriate or inappropriate in a particular country or for a particular culture; it’s about enabling more relevance and reliability on the Web using technology and new content classification standards.

I’m not trying to police the Internet, or suggest someone should. In fact, I hate the idea of companies such as DoCoMo restricting access to the Web.

The vast majority of blogs on the Web are not likely to follow a code, or even know that one exists. Most blogs are personal ramblings of individuals who like to share their thoughts online. There is however, a small percentage of bloggers who may consider themselves professional bloggers, online journalists, or just journalists (or something else?). Of these bloggers, some of them may wish to promote themselves as professionals of some description, as a differentiator from the long tail of blogs.

I wonder if Damien’s fear of a code was due to Sam Sethi’s reference to my brainchild, in his post about an unfortunate incident which involved Kathy Sierra receiving death threats from other well known bloggers.

Sam wrote

I too am going to do two things.
1. Turn off anonymous comments
2. Work with Paul Walsh to help bring out a bloggers code of conduct which he and I have spoken about for sometime, using content labels.

Please note that I didn’t write a post in response to Kathy’s unfortunate situation to promote the use Content Labels. I didn’t remain silent on purpose either; I just didn’t see the need to talk about a (potential) code just yet. I actually wanted to put some very rough guidelines together before putting something on ContentLabel.org.

It’s very unfortunate that Sam’s post could be perceived as him and I discussing a code due to Kathy’s situation. This is not the case.

So, some people will like the idea, such as Tom Raftery, Dennis Howlett, Jemima Kiss (journalist and blogger for the Guardian) amongst others and as I said earlier, some won’t.

So, my response is simple, if you’re a blogger and you don’t like the code, don’t adhere to it. If you like to read blogs and don’t care for a code of conduct, then this conversation is almost irrelevant. Perhaps more than one code is needed for different requirements, who knows?! The conversation hasn’t really started until now.

So, please feel free to keep an eye on http://contentlabel.org where the code will be created, debated, ratified, formalised, endorsed and promoted by industry.

Share it