[uf-discuss] Show Microformat Brainstorming
Charles Iliya Krempeaux
supercanadian at gmail.com
Fri Dec 16 09:31:22 PST 2005
Forgot to send this to the list.
On 12/16/05, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <supercanadian at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello Tantek,
> On 12/16/05, Tantek Çelik <tantek at cs.stanford.edu> wrote:
> > Charles,
> > I am emailing you directly on this because it appears you have not received
> > earlier email sent on this subject.
> > Regarding:
> > On 12/13/05 4:19 PM, "Charles Iliya Krempeaux" <supercanadian at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > On 12/6/05, Charles Iliya Krempeaux <supercanadian at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > >> If you look at my weblog -- http://changelog.ca/ -- you can see a
> > >> couple XOXO lists where I list (some of) the shows I watch, and (some
> > >> of) the channels I watch.
> > >
> > > I've created a wiki page for showrolls at:
> > >
> > > http://microformats.org/wiki/showroll-brainstorming
> > and
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I've started a page for the "show brainstorming" on the wiki. You can
> > > get to it via:
> > >
> > > http://microformats.org/wiki/show-brainstorming
> > >
> > >
> > First, please take a closer look at the microformats process.
> > http://microformats.org/wiki/process
> > A few comments in particular.
> > 1. Jumping straight to a *-brainstorming document is premature. There
> > should first be a *-examples document where *real* *existing* examples of
> > the content being published on the Web are documented.
> The "show-brainstorming" page contained strawmen of examples I found.
> I was hesitant to give links to the examples I found because most of
> them were from Adult sites. (Although my motivation is for non-adult
> material, adult examples are easier to find.)
> If people are OK with me posting links to that kind of material (for
> examples) I'll do so. But I (perhaps wrongly) suspected they
> Let me know though.
> > Second there should
> > be a *-formats document where previous/current *formats* that attempt to
> > solve the problem are documented. Neither of these have been created, and
> > the process page is quite clear about this.
> I'll admit that I should have read the process page more closely. But
> I have been documenting what I've been seeing in the wild on the
> show-brainstorming page. (In the section titled " Current Practice".)
> Would it be sufficient to just move these to a page called
> > 2. As far as I can tell, this is nothing but a link to a piece of media, in
> > particular video. This is ignoring (since it doesn't even mention it),
> > several existing standards and microformats:
> > a. To indicate that the type of data being linked to is video, use the
> > appropriate mime type, e.g. <a type="video/mpeg" href="show.mpg">...</a>
> > b. rel-enclosure handles the "download this" semantic already.
> > There is nowhere near enough justification for a new microformat for this.
> The motivation behind a "show microformat" is to.... (1) tell you how
> to play the media file(s). (This is especially important when there
> is more than one file, or alternatives.) (2) attach (more) metadata
> to the show (and not just the individual media files). (But most
> importantly, it's about telling you how to "play" a set of media
> It's not just about pre-downloading stuff. It's more about "how to
> play it". (If you look at some of the previous stuff I've written in
> reference to this type of thing, I mention <a>'s type attribute and
> rel-enclosure. In fact, I did expect them to be important parts of a
> "show microformat".)
> > 3. AFAIK, there has been no attempt to work with this within the current
> > media-metadata or video-metadata work/research.
> I'm a little unclear about what you mean by this -- what you mean by
> "work within". (Do you just mean put all this stuff on one of those 2
> pages?) I referenced those works. And mentioned that it should be
> used for its "metadata" work. None of those pages seemed to say
> anything about "playing" (which is what I was trying to work on with
> the "show-brainstorming" page.) (But perhaps "playing" information
> could be considered "metadata". I didn't think it would be.)
> If you could explain this more, I'd be happy to work on this from that angle.
> > Rather than inventing a
> > new media related microformat, please first understand existing work towards
> > media microformats, and work within that research.
> > http://microformats.org/wiki/media-metadata-examples
> > This has been requested several times in this thread.
> I never received any of those messages. (I don't even seem them in
> the Microformats mailing list archive.)
> > Rather than creating new pages for a specific type of media microformat,
> > please instead work on the media-metadata-* pages. There has been a lot of
> > thinking by a lot of smart folks put into trying to figure out
> > media-metadata (even just links), and ignoring that is blatant violation of
> > the process -- don't ignore nor reinvent earlier work.
> Given that what I'm trying to address is "playing" of media, do you
> still feel that I should be going at this from those pages?
> > I also noticed this: http://microformats.org/wiki/microshow
> > 1. See above problems.
> > 2. Please do not create a microformat page for something for which there
> > isn't even a strawman specification in the *-brainstorming page. Shell
> > pages like this one will be deleted.
Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.
charles @ reptile.ca
supercanadian @ gmail.com
developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/
Never forget where you came from
More information about the microformats-discuss