Regarding pandaisftw's document:
(
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1FsyumJLmQ9ckLNkHlmW1oPRGOoK3oAg_pVjFz3s0fNw/edit#slide=id.g1ce2334a0_00 )
point 1: I don't like anyone being able to create the same name. It will lead to confusion. However, it's likely that this solution will be implemented in the core anyway.
point 2: if you can just choose whichever company name you want, scammers would be able to take advantage of this. An alias contents can be updated easily.
This also means that both the name and company name can be updated, again leading to confusion.
Images may be useful, have to have some system to flag images though..
Same with audio/video.
Perhaps it would just be easier to supply a URL.
Thanks for taking the time to look at this Wesleyh, I know you're busy
Still catching up to the thread, sorry if this has already been discussed:
About point 2, and clarification of my idea:
1) *Aliases* names themselves cannot be changed (ie. they can be squatted). Thus, if I register the alias "123Industries", and we use <AliasIssuer=123Industries> tag on the asset, there is no way the issuer can change his or her company name. The URI field of this alias can hold an URL, but then the issuer should include an alias token field if he plans to do so. Additionally, the account # registering the alias must be the same as the account # issuing the asset, otherwise the client should reject the asset as a phony.
2) Asset name tags cannot be changed. I updated my doc around 2 weeks ago signifying this change. <AssetName=Shoes> is simply a string the issuer includes in his asset description. I agree with you that this can simply be added to the core. There is not much reason to actually restrict asset names to being unique *as long as you can identify the seller* (which the 1) unique company name alias helps with). Nike may have an asset called "Hiking Boots" and Ralph Lauren could have an asset called "Hiking Boots" as well. Despite being two different products under the same asset name, you would not be confused which asset is which, because you know the sellers.
Yes, images/audio/video do open up a whole new can of worms. We will have to look into ways to filter out content as explicit if we do decide to go down this path (of course, all done client-side, and the user has a choice if he wants to filter or not). I don't know how Google or Bing do this, but if someone knows, that'd be great! Imagine the NXT AE being able to show-case games much like the Steam Store does. You can have screen shots, gameplay videos, reviews, etc. right on the asset - huge potential! Or a service that sells DVDs, you can see the trailer of the movie right there in the AE.
If filtering (either through user flagging, algo, etc.) is not possible or effective, then yes, simply a URL would probably suffice (although, definitely not as slick!).
As for the categorizing, I assume you agree with this? It's much like how twitter users use hashtags to index their tweets so algos can find their tweets easily. Applying this to the AE, this will allow a gold bar asset seller to categorize his asset, and streamline searches on the client. So if a user searches gold bars, his asset will be easily found even if the user did not explicitly search his asset's name.
Pandaisftw
