[uf-new] video-info-examples page clarifications

Mary Hodder mary at dabble.com
Wed Sep 12 09:58:26 PDT 2007

Hi Manu,

Appreciate the clarifications.  Very helpful.  I will get one of my  
engineers to run some queries, to see what percentages we have across  
27 mil videos
and then post them here and in the wiki.

And post a few examples.  But i really think a few hundred examples  
is plenty.. esp when you see the patterns over and over.

Also, regarding terminology, i think having as close to real  
meaningful terms as possible is best.

For example, I'd suggest "date published" and "date released"   
because at least they are clear and require no explanation.


Mary Hodder
Founder:  Dabble
Blogs:  Dabble.com/blog

On Sep 11, 2007, at 9:31 PM, Manu Sporny wrote:

> This is a partial continuation of the following thread:
> http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-new/2007- 
> September/000823.html
> I wanted to make some clarifications about the video-info-examples  
> page
> before we go down a rabbit hole. Or rather... this is an attempt  
> not to
> go down a rabbit hole :)
> Mary Hodder wrote:
>> So the names you use here:    http://microformats.org/wiki/video- 
>> info-
>> examples#Properties    don't all make sense to me.  Where did they
>> come from?  Some of them I've never seen used before.
> They are names that I picked from the previous media-info-examples  
> pages
> and discussions. Some of them are new because of freshly discovered
> properties on web pages that were not identified in the first analysis
> pass of video services.
>> Published?  that doesn't mean anything without the explanation.  Why
>> can't you just use "date" so that we know what you are talking
>> about?  No need for long explanations if we do that.
> We could use "date". What does "date" mean? Does it mean "published
> date", or "released date", or "posted date"... because all of those  
> are
> different for the video examples that are currently being analyzed.
> I used "published" because it has a very specific meaning in  
> Microformats:
> "published" - Publish date of a weblog/microcontent entry[1]
> That being said, I went ahead and changed "published" to "post date",
> and added "release date" to the set of properties that websites  
> could have.
>> Why do you need more examples?  In the new page you just made here:
>> http://microformats.org/wiki/video-info-examples
>> Why not combine?
> I've taken your suggestion and combined the individual publishing
> examples of media-info-examples with the video-info-examples page.  
> That
> added 10 more examples to the analysis. I think we still need more.
> The reason I say this is that somebody arguing against hVideo could  
> say
> that we do not have a statistically significant data yet. You said  
> that
> there are over 1,000 sites that you collect data from. If we wanted to
> state something with a confidence level of 95% and an confidence
> interval of 5% in a population of 1000, we would have to take 278
> samples. We currently have 33.
> There's a middle ground here. I'm trying to make sure that it is much
> harder for somebody to dismiss the research that we are doing by  
> falling
> back on the "you didn't analyze enough examples" argument. Thus I  
> don't
> think that 33 examples are good enough to make our point.
>> I'm not really sure what you are getting at with your list of
>> properties then?
> The list of properties is defined so that everybody understands what
> each property means. This is important because we don't want to  
> have any
> misunderstandings about the definition of a property name. So, if a
> website on the video-info-examples page has a 'trackback url', we can
> look its definition up and know that it means the following:
> "The trackback URL lets you know who has linked to the current blog
> entry."[3]
> Perhaps I have done a bad job with the property definitions on the  
> video
> examples page? The goal was to create a common vocabulary with  
> specific
> definitions for analysis without getting too attached to the terms.
>> We know people, all over the web, across the 27 million videos Dabble
>> has indexed, as well as the rest of the videos we don't have but are
>> mostly hosted by those same 1000 hosters, that this list rings true:
> I trust that you have the data and have done the analysis, so would it
> be possible to release that data and analysis to this list so that we
> may integrate hard numbers into the wiki? Adding 1,000 examples that
> have already been analyzed for the Microformats community would be
> fantastic!
>> By putting price and purchase URL right at the top of the definitions
>> you are giving me the impression that you care most about that.
> Well, that certainly wasn't intended. I've added the following text to
> the properties section, does the following help?
> "These properties are in alphabetical order and in no way represent  
> the
> frequency of their use in the examples. The property names are also  
> not
> final and probably will not be used when the Microformat vocabulary is
> decided. Deciding the vocabulary of the Microformat is not  
> performed at
> this stage of examples collection and analysis. These property  
> names and
> definitions are listed here in an attempt to keep the current and  
> future
> example analysis teams using the same definitions for property  
> names."[3]
> Here's to hoping that this e-mail helped clarify more than it  
> muddied :)
> -- manu
> [1] http://microformats.org/wiki/existing-classes
> [2] http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm
> [3] http://microformats.org/wiki/video-info-examples#Properties
> _______________________________________________
> microformats-new mailing list
> microformats-new at microformats.org
> http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new

More information about the microformats-new mailing list