![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||||
Welcome to the GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum forums. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. |
![]() ![]() |
|
Discuss what's fucking going on, and which programs are best and worst. One-time "program" announcements from "established" webmasters are allowed. |
|
Thread Tools |
![]() |
#1 |
So Fucking Banned
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 679
|
Genius MAS idea - fucking industry revolutionary!
Ok I had this idea earlier and I seriously think it is one of the best ideas ever.
Please check the CMS from Mansion Productions www.mansionproductions.com (MAS) to see what the fuck I am going on about. Right, one of the most annoying things I hate to do is categorise content. What about if you could buy the content already set up for MAS? You have a default set of attributes, alot more than are currently default in MAS, I also think there should be some way people can share attribute lists in MAS but that is another function. Ok Mansion make some sort of program that content providers get for free which enables them to create a file which sets attributes, face image etc data into the same folder as the content. Then when you upload the content you just have to set category and the rest of the data is pulled from what the content store has already put in. Do you see what I mean? This would cut down work for site owners by 80%. Obviously related content sets, if you have model listing etc will still have to be done but the majority will be done already. The content stores could also find some way to export the data to their store hence making their site more friendly? Good, bad or I do give a fuck I thought this was a would you hit it thread? |
![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Confirmed User
Industry Role:
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,771
|
Inovative ideas are useless here, please go away..
Just kidding. Good idea but getting people to do it is another thing. The script in my sig does exacty what you just said except for Tube sites, but there's no mad dash to use it so far.
__________________
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
So Fucking Banned
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 679
|
Quote:
See I think content stores would use it if it could also put the data into their stores so that even if someone doesnt use MAS the search facility on their store is that much better. I made a post about stores labeling models this could also be done but their would pretty much have to be a industry wide default attributes and model list. It would save so much fucking time though. |
|
![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Confirmed User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,120
|
Try converting it to php.
__________________
![]() |
![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Confirmed User
Industry Role:
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,771
|
Why?
This is way faster than PHP and it doesn't need SQL with all it's slowness and down time.
__________________
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
So Fucking Banned
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 679
|
I would like to see what Mansion and various content store owners think of this.
|
![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Mansion
Posts: 84
|
Hey BluePlayer,
This is a very sound idea indeed. Mansion is all up to it, however it is more to the content providers to supply this information. The way I see it, it would be most universal if they provide a XML file together with the content set, with all the meta information in there - title, optional short description, and a list of categories/niches best describing the content. Also - model details - name, bio, body measures, hair color etc. A link to a face image would work great too (big enough so that the reading script can resize it to the desired dimensions without loss of quality). If there are content providers ready to jump in, Mansion will be more than happy to work with them and define the standards. No doubt it is a win-win for all sides - less work for the webmasters/paysite owners to put their new content online, and more business to the content providers who offer this option. |
![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
FBOP Class Of 2013
Industry Role:
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: bumfuck, ky
Posts: 35,562
|
Quote:
last time I had ANY slowness or downtime with my server was with 3 hosts ago, some crap host I won't name in public fact remains, if it isn't php/mysql I don't grab it...I see cgi and I hit the "back" button |
|
![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
FBOP Class Of 2013
Industry Role:
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: bumfuck, ky
Posts: 35,562
|
back to the thread topic, it would be great if ALL content providers would do this for all CMS systems
I know I am using awiz right now and it is already set up so that I could do this exact thing |
![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
So Fucking Banned
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 679
|
It would need some company to create a standard format that everyone follows.
Maybe MAS could get together with a few content providers they know and get it started? |
![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Mansion
Posts: 84
|
The exact format is not so important here.
XML is an industry standard, and I am sure that every CMS provider can easily ammend their scripts to interpret and import the various fields into the native database format. At least for Mansion, I prefer to have a different import script for every content provider, rather than trying to push providers to use a single format. I know from experience that it is nearly impossible to find 3 people with the same understanding when it comes to defining niches. I also understand that it would be a huge job for content providers to start describing all of their sets from scratch, following new standards, and they would probably not do that. So, if we want to see any action in short term, maybe content providers can consider the creation of such XML descriptors using the data they already have in their own systems. Once we have a couple of providers willing to participate in this initiative, then it would be easier to define a standard for the rest to follow. |
![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |